Egypt Leads Fight Against NGO Agitators | A real revolution may be about to follow

Feb 20, 2012

by Tony Cartalucci | Land Destroyer Report

However NGOs are not “liberal-progressive.” They are the system administrators of modern empire, an empire being forged by the wars and covert operations Boot is a chief proponent of. The absence of NGOs in any given nation, means a nation free from the influence of Wall Street & London’s networks and meddling. That is why Boot feverishly penned, “Obama’s Egyptian Hostage Crisis,” in an attempt to spur a more vigorous response to what would seem like a very minor event in the context of greater global conflicts. Egypt’s arrest and trying of 19 Americans, all of whom are directly involved in Wall Street’s network of National Endowment for Democracy (NED) funded NGOs, including the head of the International Republican Institute (IRI) office in Egypt, signifies a potential turning point not just in Egypt, but around the world. →

Empire’s Double-Edged Sword: Global Military + NGOs

Feb 19, 2012

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer Activist Post 

Tearing down sovereign nations and replacing them with global system administrators

Colonial Southeast Asia circa 1850s. Thailand/Siam was never colonized but made many concessions.

Part 1: Imperialism is Alive and Well

FOUNDING DECLARATION OF THE LIBYAN POPULAR NATIONAL MOVEMENT (English and Arabic)

Lizzie Phelan’s Blog:

February 16, 2012

“This statement has been passed to me from trusted Libyan sources, but I cannot reveal their identities because to do so would put the lives of many people in danger.” – Lizzie Phelan, Journalist

FOUNDING DECLARATION OF THE LIBYAN POPULAR NATIONAL MOVEMENT

“HUMAN RIGHTS” WARRIORS FOR EMPIRE | Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch

“Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have chosen sides in the Washington-backed belligerency – the side of Empire.” Syria has no choice but to secure every square foot of its territory. “Faced with the certainty of superpower-backed attack under the guise of ‘protecting’ civilians in “liberated” territory, Syria cannot afford to cede even one neighborhood of a single city – not one block! – or of any rural or border enclave, to armed rebels and foreign jihadis.”

by BAR executive editor Glen Ford

“NATO wants desperately to identify some sliver of Syrian soil on which to plant the ‘humanitarian’ flag of intervention.”

The largest imperial offensive since the Iraq invasion of March, 2003, is in full swing, under the banner of “humanitarian” intervention – Barack Obama’s fiendishly clever upgrade of George Bush’s “dumb” wars. Having failed to obtain a Libyan-style United Nations Security Council fig leaf for a “humanitarian” military strike against Syria, the United States shifts effortlessly to a global campaign “outside the U.N. system” to expand its NATO/Persian Gulf royalty/Jihadi coalition. Next stop: Tunisia, where Washington’s allies will assemble on February 24 to sharpen their knives as “Friends of Syria.” The U.S. State Department has mobilized to shape the “Friends” membership and their “mandate” – which is warlord-speak for refining an ad hoc alliance for the piratical assault on Syria’s sovereignty.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are swigging the ale with their fellow buccaneers. These “human rights” warriors, headquartered in the bellies of empires past and present, their chests shiny with medals of propagandistic service to superpower aggression in Libya, contribute “left” legitimacy to the imperial project. London-based Amnesty International held a global “day of action” to rail against Syria for “crimes against humanity” and to accuse Russia and China of using their Security Council vetoes to “betray” the Syrian people – echoing the war hysteria out of Washington, Paris, London and the royal pigsties of Riyadh and Doha. New York-based Human Rights Watch denounced Moscow and Beijing’s actions as “incendiary” – as if it were not the empire and its allies who were setting the Middle East and Africa on fire, arming and financing jihadis – including hundreds of veteran Libyan Salafists now operating in Syria.

“Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch contribute ‘left’ legitimacy to the imperial project.”

Under Obama’s “intelligent” (as opposed to “dumb”) imperial tutelage, colonial genocidaires like France now propose creation of “humanitarian corridors” inside Syria “to allow NGOs to reach the zones where there are scandalous massacres.” NATO flatly rejected such a corridor in Libya when sub-Saharan Africans and black Libyans were being massacred by militias armed and financed by the same “Friends” that now besiege Syria.

Turkey claims it has rejected, for now, the idea of setting up humanitarian “buffer zones” along its border with Syria – inside Syrian territory – while giving arms, training and sanctuary to Syrian military deserters. In reality, it is Syrian Army troop and armor concentrations on the border that have thwarted the establishment of such a “buffer” – a bald euphemism for creating a “liberated zone” that must be “protected” by NATO or some agglomeration of U.S.-backed forces.

NATO, which bombed Libya non-stop for six months, inflicting tens of thousands of casualties while refusing to count a single body, wants desperately to identify some sliver of Syrian soil on which to plant the “humanitarian” flag of intervention. They are transparently searching for a Benghazi, to justify a replay of the Libyan operation – the transparent fact that prompted the Russian and Chinese vetoes.

Faced with the certainty of superpower-backed attack under the guise of “protecting” civilians in “liberated” territory, Syria cannot afford to cede even one neighborhood of a single city – not one block! – or of any rural or border enclave, to armed rebels and foreign jihadis. That road leads directly to loss of sovereignty and possible dissection of Syria – which western pundits are already calling a “hodge-podge” nation that could be a “failed state.” Certainly, the French and British are experts at carving up other people’s territories, having drawn the national boundaries of the region after World War One. It is an understatement to say that Israel would be pleased.

“It is the Libya formula, and might as well have come straight from Barack Obama’s mouth.”

With the Syrian military’s apparent successes in securing most of Homs and other centers of rebellion, the armed opposition has stepped up its terror tactics – a campaign noted with great alarm by the Arab League’s own Observer Mission to Syria, leading Saudi Arabia and Qatar to suppress the Mission’s report. Instead, the Gulf States are pressing the Arab League to openly “provide all kinds of political and material support” to the opposition, meaning arms and, undoubtedly, more Salafist fighters. Aleppo, Syria’s main commercial and industrial city, which had seen virtually no unrest, was struck by two deadly car bombs last week – signature work of the al-Qaida affiliate in neighboring Iraq.

The various “Friends of Syria,” all nestled in the U.S./NATO/Saudi/Qatar cocoon, now openly speak of all-out civil war in Syria – by which they mean stepped up armed conflict financed and directed by themselves – as the preferred alternative to the protracted struggle that the regime appears to be winning. There is one caveat: no “Western boots on the ground in any form,” as phrased by British Foreign Secretary William Hague. It is the Libya formula, and might as well have come straight from Barack Obama’s mouth.

Syria is fighting for its national existence against an umbrella of forces mobilized by the United States and NATO. Of the 6,000 or so people that have died in the past 11 months, about a third have been Syrian soldiers and police – statistical proof positive that this is an armed assault on the state. There is no question of massive foreign involvement, or that the aim of U.S. policy is regime change, as stated repeatedly by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (“Assad must go,” she told reporters in Bulgaria).

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have chosen sides in the Washington-backed belligerency – the side of Empire. As groups most often associated with (what passes for) the Left in their headquarters countries, they are invaluable allies of the current imperial offensive. They have many fellow travelers in (again, what passes for) anti-war circles in the colonizing and neo-colonizing nations. The French “Left” lifted hardly a finger while a million Algerians died in the struggle for independence, and have not proved effective allies of formerly colonized people in the 50 years, since. Among the European imperial powers, only Portugal’s so-called Carnation Revolution of 1974, a coup by young officers, resulted in substantial relief for the subjects of empire: the withdrawal of troops from Portugal’s African colonies.

“Of the 6,000 or so people that have died in the past 11 months, about a third have been Syrian soldiers and police – statistical proof positive that this is an armed assault on the state.”

The U.S. anti-war movement lost its mass character as soon as the threat of a draft was removed, in the early Seventies, while the United States continued to bomb Vietnam (and test new and exotic weapons on its people) until the fall of Saigon, in 1975. All that many U.S. lefties seemed to want was to get the Republicans off their backs, in 2008, and to Hell with the rest of the world. Democrat Barack Obama has cranked the imperial war machine back into high gear, with scarcely a peep from the “Left.”

There was great ambivalence – the most polite word I can muster – among purported leftists in the United States and Europe to NATO’s bombardment and subjugation of Libya. Here we are again, in the face of existential imperial threats to Syria and Iran, as leftists temporize about human rights while the “greatest purveyor of violence in the world today” blazes new warpaths.

There is no such thing as an anti-war activist who is not an anti-imperialist. And the only job of an anti-imperialist in the belly of the beast is to disarm the beast. Absent that, s/he is useless to humanity.

As we used to say: You are part of the solution – or you are part of the problem. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are part of the problem.

BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com

WHY ARE PRO-REGIME CHANGE LEFTIES IN THE LEADERSHIP OF THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT?

7 February 2012

Introduction by Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm

This is a good article from ‘Socialist Action’ which outlines the latest developments with Syria in relation to the Arab League, the west and the UN.  Importantly it also focuses on a small group of people presenting themselves as leftists in the anti-war movement around a group – Counterfire – who were expelled/left the organisation called the ‘Socialist Workers Party’.

 The SWP heralded the lynching of Gadafi – which was facilitated by two nato air-strikes on Gadafi’s convoy – as something to be welcomed comparable to the killing of Italian fascist leader Mussolini. Obviously these people cannot get their heads around this, but to compare the death of the most important anti-imperialist leader of Africa and of the Global South of recent times with the leader of Italian colonialism, who colonised Libya wiping out a massive part of the Libyan population, just shows one how far from any understanding of the people of the Global South organisations like the swp are. →

Bolibya? Juan Carlos Zambrana sets the Record Straight on the Destabilization Campaign Against Morales Led by U.S. Funded NGOs

January 23, 2012

By Cory Morningstar

“Al-Jazeera, which started out as a credible news agency, has become the whore of international journalism and is as credible as the scrawlings of a demented simpleton on the walls of a football stadium. What is really happening in Syria, we shall be reporting in the forthcoming days. Meanwhile let us tell the story of Libya, which you will not see on Al-Jazeera, nor indeed on the British Bullshit Corporation, its friend and bedmate.” —Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey, Pravda.Ru, from the article The West, Syria and Libya.

It is no secret that Al Jazeera has become an instrumental tool of propaganda (Wadah Khanfar, Al-Jazeera and the triumph of televised propaganda by Thierry Meyssan), serving the Imperialist powers in the expanding destabilization campaigns taking place at unprecedented speed across the globe. What is perhaps less known is the destabilization campaign staged against the Bolivian President Evo Morales, which Morales successfully circumvented and over-came in late 2011. (Media reported several deaths including a baby – all which proved to be complete fabrication.)

→

The Gaddafi Mercenaries and the Division of Africa | Amnesty International

Exposing the lies of the use of ‘African mercenaries’ in Libya

Via Global Civilians for Peace: “Amnesty International was well aware of the false accusations of the use of ‘African mercenaries’ in Libya. It was a lie used by NATO and their mouthpieces in the mainstream media to de-legitimise and demonise the Libyan government and cover up the mass racist lynchings, torture and imprisonment of black Libyans and migrant workers by the ‘rebels’. Surely as a self-proclaimed human rights organisation Amnesty International should have exposed these heinous ‘rebel’ crimes to the world, condemned the mainstream media’s complicity and campaigned on behalf of the black communities in Libya facing this racist onslaught.”

For more information on the ‘rebels’ relentless racist campaign of mass detention, lynchings and atrocities see the following compilation of articles and videos:

http://globalciviliansforpeace.com/2011/11/22/rebel-racism-compilation-of-articles-and-videos/

For more information on the truth behind the Imperialist war on Libya visit www.thehumanitarianwar.com.

The Libyan Tragedy: Lessons for the Western Left

January 1, 2012

By Tim Anderson

One might have thought that with the “humanitarian’ pretexts for the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan fairly fresh in the mind, the western “left’ might have hesitated before backing (or refusing to oppose) a similar stunt in Libya.

Apparently not. Perhaps caught off guard by the rapid development of events, many of those who consider themselves “left’ or progressive, in the western-imperial cultures, happily joined in the big-power-orchestrated chorus against “dictator’ Gaddafi. In doing so they helped legitimise the overthrow of one of the more independent regimes in the middle east, and helped extend big power control of the region.

Never mind some quibbles over the carpet bombing and eventual public torture and murder of Gaddafi himself. Never mind the complaint that a “no fly zone’ should not have meant missile attacks. The damage was done. By joining in the chorus against this western-designated “dictator’, they effectively backed his very public torture and murder, along with the destruction of an independent political will in that small country.

The consequences of the “humanitarian intervention’ in Libya were pretty well understood by most of the left in developing countries (i.e. in most of the world). Fidel Castro, notably, expressed scepticism about Gaddafi’s political philosophy and some of his practice, but strongly opposed any NATO intervention (1). The western “left’, by contrast, was fragmented and confused on matters of basic principle.

I suggest here some lessons for a western “left’ that seems to have found itself deeply embedded in imperial culture:

1. Beware the “humanitarian’ pretexts for war and imperial intervention against “dictators’

The “civilian massacres’ by Gaddafi were invented. The insurrection, armed by NATO from day one (2), was being put down by the Libyan army, and the “rebels’ cried “we are civilians’ as they were being beaten. Others claimed attacks, such as the alleged air strikes on civilians of 22 February, were simply fabricated (3). After a while, the armed insurrection could be “justified’ by reference to the Libyan government’s earlier attacks on “civilians’. Later on the cluster bombing of the town of Misrata, by NATO, was falsely blamed on Gaddafi (4). The western “left’ should have recalled that most imperial wars and interventions were started on similar false pretexts. If Gaddafi and a relatively independent state could be wiped out so easily on such a pretext, the same could apply to many dozens of other independent states.

2. Beware of wishful illusions over a heroic “rising of the masses’

There was no such spontaneous uprising in Libya. The opposition factions were well established (if disunited) before 2011 and the creation of the NATO-backed “National Transitional Council’ (NTC): Islamic groups, exile groups armed by the US from the 1980s, Benghazi clans, including those linked to the deposed monarchy (5) along with technocrats who recently defected from Gaddafi’s government and wanted fuller engagement with western capital (notably Mahmoud Jibril and Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, along with the late Abdul Fatah Younis, murdered in July by his TNC colleagues) (6). It is no coincidence that those same groups, having prevailed only because of NATO air power, are now warring, not only with Gaddafi loyalists, but amongst themselves, over the spoils (7).

3. “Eccentric’ foreign leaders are not fair game for murder

Gaddafi certainly ran a different political system to the alleged western “democracies’ (which reify a nominal vote plus corporate dictatorship). While the point of international relations has never been whether outsiders agree with a national system, the Libyan system did have some advantages. Libya under Gaddafi, had a high degree of social inclusion and social citizenship. There was a free education and health system, cheap energy and credit and most owned their own homes. Libya’s human development ranking under Gaddafi was by far the best in Africa (8). Further, a UN Human Rights Council report in January 2011 recognised and supported a range of human rights developments in the country (9). All that was gone after the NATO-backed insurrection, complete with missile and drone attacks, carpet bombing, the slaughter of tens of thousands (western audiences have become accustomed to this) and the public assassination of the leader of a non-aggressive regime. Branding a foreign leader a “dictator’ has become the new “license to kill’.

4. Why see “humanitarian intervention’ as a desirable development?

The only regimes advocating “humanitarian intervention’ are the imperial powers and the former colonists (10). We know what their track record is (11). They habitually seek to control resources and markets, and to dominate entire regions. Why should any intelligent human being believe in the “Santa Claus’ theory of international relations? It should have been no surprise to anyone that the NATO-dependent rebels, early in the conflict, offered a large swag of their country’s strategic resources to a certain NATO member, in exchange for military backing (12).

5. Beware the imperial role of UN agencies, including the ICC

While the UN’s Security Council did not authorise the bombing of Libya and “regime change’, it did give NATO the proverbial foot in the door. Other multilateral agencies, such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (in the constant attacks on Iran) and the International Criminal Court (which appears to only prosecute African leaders) are now heavily compromised by the big powers. In the Libyan case the ICC head Luis Moreno-Ocampo even backed US accusations against Gaddafi which had embarrassed the Europeans (13). But then, as Wikileaks showed, as early as March 2009 Moreno-Ocampo had been collaborating with US diplomats over the management of political regime change in Africa (14)

6. What option do “we’ have during a violent crisis, such as that in Libya?

First, forget the royal / imperial “we’. It is precisely imperial culture that encourages us to believe we can judge the world and determine the fate of other peoples.

Second read the first article of the twin covenants of the International Bill of Rights, which was lifted directly from the UN’s “Declaration on Decolonisation’ (1960): “All peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.’

Next, get clear why colonisation and imperialism were declared to be at the root of the worst of all human rights violations.

Virtually all the imperial and colonial powers (Australia, Belgium, Dominican Republic, France, Portugal, Spain, Union of South Africa, United Kingdom, United States of America) abstained when the Declaration of Decolonisation was first put. Six years later self-determination came the founding principle of both the international covenants on human rights (the ICCPR and the ICESCR). The UN now refers to self-determination the “essential condition’ for the guarantee and promotion of all other rights, standing “apart from and before all the other rights’ in the Covenants. Nevertheless, in western discussions on “human rights’, the principle is ignored.

Educated people in developing countries understand that Libya – like Afghanistan and Iraq and other neo-colonies – will have to go through a renewed process of decolonisation. And that is the real tragedy of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.

The neo-imperial theory of “the responsibility to protect’ attempts to rewrite the international order and to lend a gloss to brutal interventions. Yet imperial interventions never assist “human rights’. The Timor case of 1999 did nothing to undermine this principle of non-intervention (15). But after Afghanistan and Iraq we, the left in the imperial cultures, should have known better.

Footnotes

(1) Fidel Castro (2011) “NATO, war, lies and business’, see: http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/Perspectives_1/article_7662.shtml

(2) Libya Rebels had NATO Weapons from Day 1 – Brand New in the box:

(3) “Airstrikes in Libya did not take place – Russian military’:

(4) Human Rights Investigation (2011) “Destroying Misrata to save it’, at: http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/05/23/destroying-misrata-to-save-it/

(5) See for example Peter Dale Scott (2011) “Who are the Libyan Freedom Fighters and Their Patrons?’, at: http://japanfocus.org/-Peter_Dale-Scott/3504

(6) For example the former Gaddafi ministers who rapidly became the western favourites and leaders of the NTC: Mahmoud Jibril (see: http://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2011/03/23/meet-mahmoud-jibril/); and Mustafa Abdul-Jalil (see: http://libyasos.blogspot.com/2011/11/mustafa-abdul-jalil-and-mahmoud-jibril.html).

(7) Chris Stephen (2011) “Libyan scramble for -100bn in assets fractures the peace at Tripoli airport’, at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/17/libya-tripoli-airport-assets-un

(8) According to the 2011 Human Development Report (UNDP 2011: Table 1, p.128), Libya ranked 64th, well ahead of the next two African countries, its neighbours Tunisia (at 94th) and Algeria (at 96th).

(9) UN Human Rights Council (2011) “Report of the Working Group on the Universal

Periodic Review, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya’, 4 January, at: http://libyanfreepress.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/report_working_group_universal_periodic_review.pdf …

(10 )All the major developing countries opposed the attacks on Libya — see: VOA (2011) “BRICS Nations Oppose Use of Force in Libya’, 14 April, at: http://www.voanews.com/english/news/BRICS-Nations-Oppose-Use-of-Force-in-Libya-119833134.html

(11) William Blum (2011) “Killing Hope: US Military and CIA. Interventions Since World War II’, at: http://killinghope.org/

(12) Granma (2011) “Transition Council promised 35% of Libyan oil to France in return for support’, at: http://www.granma.cu/ingles/international-i/2sept-Libyan.html

(13) (a) Ewan MacAskill (2011) “Gaddafi ‘supplies troops with Viagra to encourage mass rape’, claims diplomat’, at: then (b) “I.C.C. Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo: Gaddafi Personally Ordered Mass Rape, Bought Containers of “Viagra-Type” Drugs for Troops’, at:

(14) The Guardian (2010) “US embassy cables: ICC prosecutor alleges Bashir secret fortune of $9bn’, at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/

(15) The sending of foreign troops to East Timor in 1999 was not an imperial intervention. The Timorese did not call in foreign air strikes against Indonesia, they fought and won that battle themselves, taking advantage of big changes within Indonesia. A diverse (eventually UN-backed) force was then called in to police an independence process that had already been won by the Timorese and conceded by the Indonesians.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/3/The-Libyan-Tragedy-lesson-by-Tim-Anderson-120101-709.html

AntiWar.Com Status by Sibel Edmonds

Quick Update: Payoff for Jordan’s Syria-Front Generosity, AntiWar.Com Status, RT Today

Sibel Edmonds Boiling Frogs Post

Thursday, 22. December 2011

I am looking at a fully-packed schedule for today. Peter and I will be interviewing Pepe Escobar on Syria-Turkey-Jordan. I am scheduled for an interview-analysis session with Russia Today. I have several phone calls scheduled with my sources on the latest developments in Syria. And there are tons of topics/issues/cases I want to cover and talk about that have to wait until things calm down a bit … which almost never happens.

Let’s start with Jordan. Last week we broke the story on reported US-NATO troops and operations in Jordan- on the Jordanian-Syrian border. Follow-ups to our report were carried out by only a few select international news organizations. Pepe Escobar had an excellent article on that (see here).

Today I received this report on the generous financial aid granted to Jordan by the United States.

US to Provide Jordan with $660 Million in Aid in 2012

AMMAN, Dec. 20 (Xinhua) — The United States will provide Jordan with 660 million U.S. dollars in 2012 as economic and military assistance, Jordan’s ministry of planning and international cooperation said Tuesday…The U.S. assistance to Jordan from 2007 to 2011 reached 2.4 billion, according to the ministry.
…

You see, Jordan is fairly dependent on US generosity, aka military-financial aid. And as expected, that dependency tends to ‘color’ a lot of things. Come to think of it, almost every member of the so-called Arab League appears to have similar dependencies: US financial-military aid and support to maintain and sustain their regimes’ existence. Hello, you remember our atrocious Bahrain regime, no? Oh well, they too are part of this ‘Arab League.’ So basically, these dependent puppet dictator regimes are now in charge of determining Syria’s level of dictatorship and soon–to-come final destiny. Ironic, no? Okay, I’ll have more on this when I reach the ‘calm’ period…

Next, I want you to monitor the Antiwar.Com website for a while. This once-upon-a-time excellent website has been going through tremendous not so pretty changes. Coincidentally, these changes coincide with recent mysterious appearances of their donor angels. What I want you to look for and keep tabs on:

1- More and more they’ve been citing articles and news from their once-culprit foe US MSM. Their updates are filled with NYT, WP, CNN, Huffington Post …created twists and spins.

2- If you remember, a few months ago they put on this publicity and PR campaign for the Soros-Rockefeller funded NGO who actually gave Obama an award for being the most transparent president of the United States.

3- Check out their author column. Do you notice my name there? Well, since the unnamed mysterious donors showed up, about 2 years ago, to round up their half a million dollars a year fund, they have decided to keep my name but completely censor anything I write on their ‘once-upon-a-time’ issues: police state, perpetual wars, secrecy, whistleblowers…

4- Contrary to their title, name, they have been loudly and repeatedly and unquestioningly reporting only the unsupported numbers killed by the Assad regime in Syria, Assad’s alleged inflicted massacres, and …Now, for a site called AntiWar, they are either willingly or unintentionally beating the war drums and spreading unconfirmed propaganda, exactly the same way our infamous MSM has been doing…

It is truly a shame. I like and have been following a few of their excellent editorial writers such as Raimondo and Giraldi. They usually have a good selection of editorials. And as I said, they used to be exemplary as an independent news roundup site on civil liberties and war related topics.

I’ll have more on AW, and will inquire about their unnamed mysterious funder angels, but please go and review their last two year archives, and start accumulating your own research data…You may also want to send them e-mails-notes and encourage them to go back to what they used to be: an alternative, not an echo wall for the MSM. Hopefully they are not beyond rescue, and if they are, and they prove to be, then, I suggest their public donors look elsewhere to support…

I’ll be on Russia Today for an interview. I’ll post the clip as soon as it becomes available.

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2011/12/22/quick-update-payoff-for-jordan%E2%80%99s-syria-front-generosity-antiwar-com-status-rt-today/

U.S. Funded ‘Activist’ Becomes President of Tunisia | From A-Z, the Arab Spring is Fake

“It is a necessity to research the backgrounds and affiliations of all political groups and NGOs, and assess both their funding and their affiliations. The National Endowment for Democracy is indisputably disingenuous in both their stated cause and their actions. Their board of directors alone betrays their motto of “Supporting freedom around the world,” as it is almost entirely made up of corporate-fascists, Neo-Conservative warmongers, and corporate lobbyists. The organizations, opposition groups, media outlets, and NGOs, they support seek to destabilize and destroy the nations they infest.”

Dec 13, 2011

From A-Z, the Arab Spring is Fake.

Cross posted from LIBYA 360°

Tony Cartalucci

December 13, 2011 – The BBC hails Tunisia’s assembly and their election of a new president in their article, “Tunisian activist, Moncef Marzouki, named president.” What the BBC predictably fails to mention is that Marzouki’s organization, the Tunisian League for Human Rights, was a US National Endowment for Democracy and George Soros Open Society-funded International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) member organization.

Photo: Tunisia’s new “president,” Moncef Marzouki, a veteran Western collaborator whose last two decades of political activity have been supported and subsidized by the US government and US corporate-financier funded foundations.

It was earlier reported in “Soros Celebrates the Fall of Tunisia,” that Marzouki was named “interim-president” of Tunisia and that the myriad of NGOs and opposition organizations that worked with him to overthrow the government of Tunisia were fully subsidized and backed by the US government and US corporate-funded foundations.
Marzouki, who spent two decades in exile in Paris, France, was also founder and head of the Arab Commission for Human Rights, a collaborating institution with the US NED World Movement for Democracy (WMD) including for a “Conference on Human Rights Activists in Exile” and a participant in the WMD “third assembly” alongside Marzouki’s Tunisian League for Human Rights, sponsored by NED, Soros’ Open Society, and USAID.

Marzouki, along with his Libyan counterpart Abdurrahim el-Keib, formally of the Petroleum Institute, sponsored by British Petroleum (BP), Shell, France’s Total, the Japan Oil Development Company, and the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, makes for the second Western proxy installed into power either by covert sedition or overt military aggression, during the US-engineered “Arab Spring.” Western proxies in Egypt including Mohamed ElBaradei and Mamdouh Hamza are also vying for power in the wake of similar foreign-fomented unrest, while NATO backed militants harbored in Turkey are attempting to overthrow the government of Syria by force.

The Arab Spring is Fake

Gene Sharp of the Albert Einstein Institution penned the book “From Dictatorship to Democracy,” originally designated for the destabilization and recolonization of Myanmar, still called “Burma” throughout much of the West. Sharp’s book would be utilized by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) throughout Eastern Europe, throughout Asia, and eventually, in 2011, for the US-engineered “Arab Spring.”
According to Sharp’s own Albert Einstein Institution (AEI) 2000-2004 annual report, AEI had been sponsored by the US government’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and its funded subsidiary International Republican Institute (IRI) to train activists in Serbia (page 18) Zimbabwe (page 23) and Myanmar (page 26) to help overthrow their respective sovereign governments.

Australia’s Southern Cross University’s “Activating Human Rights & Peace (AHRP)” conference had put out a revealing account of their 2008 proceedings illustrating that all of Gene Sharp’s work, beyond what was even mentioned in his own institution’s annual report, had been fully funded and in support of the US government and its global domineering agenda. Beginning on page 26, Sharp’s affiliations, in particular with the National Endowment for Democracy, which is described as carrying out “a lot of work that was formerly undertaken by the CIA,” as well as the Ford Foundation, and billionaire Wall Street patriarch George Soros’ Open Society Institute are fleshed out in immense detail.

The “Arab Spring” itself was not spontaneous, nor was it indigenous. Rather it was a was a premeditated geopolitical plot engineered by US corporate-financier interests years in advance. The New York Times in its article, “U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings,” clearly stated as much when it reported, “a number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington.”

Further confirming this were public statements made by the US State Department-sponsored “Alliance for Youth Movements” (AYM) counting Egypt’s April 6 Youth Movement among its above mentioned inaugural AYM summit attendees in New York City as far back as 2008. Foreign Policy magazine admited that April 6 received further training from CANVAS in Serbia, before fomenting unrest in Egypt. FP magazine would also report that “CANVAS has worked with dissidents from almost every country in the Middle East; the region contains one of CANVAS’s biggest successes, Lebanon, and one of its most disappointing failures, Iran.”

The destabilization in Iran, of course, was drawn up by corporate-funded Brookings Institution, as articulated in its “Which Path to Persia?” report, with the actual mechanics of organizing the foreign-funded revolution subcontracted to organizations like US-funded CANVAS, NED and its subsidiaries.

In an April 2011 AFP report, Michael Posner, the assistant US Secretary of State for Human Rights and Labor, stated that the “US government has budgeted $50 million in the last two years to develop new technologies to help activists protect themselves from arrest and prosecution by authoritarian governments.” The report went on to explain that the US (emphasis added) “organized training sessions for 5,000 activists in different parts of the world. A session held in the Middle East about six weeks ago gathered activists from Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon who returned to their countries with the aim of training their colleagues there.” Posner would add, “They went back and there’s a ripple effect.” The ripple effect Posner is talking about is of course the “spontaneous” “Arab Spring” and bears a striking resemblance to the campaign of destabilization Gene Sharp and AEI perpetuated throughout Eastern Europe as described in detail in the above mentioned AHRP report.

Conclusion

With a similar gambit now playing out in Russia, fueled by the exact same Western organizations and foundations, not only is it obvious that Tunisia was overthrown, not by spontaneous, indigenous protests, but rather premeditated foreign-funded sedition carried out by the likes of Moncef Marzouki and his US-funded opposition group, it is also obvious that Tunisia was just one of many nations destabilized in the largest concerted geopolitical reordering since World War II. With Russia now targeted by foreign-fomented color revolutions, the US’ declaration of a new “American Pacific Century” aiming to contain China, and Western proxies beginning to climb into positions of power throughout Northern Africa and the Middle East, it is clear that the campaign of encirclement and destabilization of both Russia and China by the forces of global corporate fascism described in February 2011?s “The Middle East & then the World” is indeed an unfolding reality.

It is a necessity to research the backgrounds and affiliations of all political groups and NGOs, and assess both their funding and their affiliations. The National Endowment for Democracy is indisputably disingenuous in both their stated cause and their actions. Their board of directors alone betrays their motto of “Supporting freedom around the world,” as it is almost entirely made up of corporate-fascists, Neo-Conservative warmongers, and corporate lobbyists. The organizations, opposition groups, media outlets, and NGOs, they support seek to destabilize and destroy the nations they infest.

Exposing and fighting this disingenuous enterprise is important. Equally important is to identify the corporate-financier interests driving its true agenda and the global elites’ overarching plan of achieving global hegemony. Boycott these interests entirely out of business, and replace them with business models, institutions, and bodies of governance that truly serve “we the people.”

http://libya360.wordpress.com/2011/12/13/u-s-funded-activist-becomes-president-of-tunisia/

HUMANITARIAN WAR IN LIBYA? THERE IS NO EVIDENCE!
LIBYA AND THE BIG LIE: USING HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS TO LAUNCH WARS

http://youtu.be/2D0LEW6vGF8

http://youtu.be/4B-BKWf9G4M

© Copyright 2011 by Libya 360°

This page may be republished for non-commercial purposes as long as reprints include a verbatim copy of the article/page in its entirety, respecting its integrity and cite the author and Libya 360° as the source including a live link to the article/page.

Subscribe to Libya 360° for critical updates on the Imperialist war waged upon Libya: http://libya360.wordpress.com/

THE BRUTAL MURDER OF MUAMMAR AND MU’TASSIM GADDAFI