Middle East 'Arab Spring' Revolts? Orchestrated by whom?

[Disco_Destroyer]

Well as the troubles are spreading?
I can see pro's and Cons for Western Leaders, for me though the knod seems to tip in favour of the Region to gain and Western Backed Elites to lose the most. Any thoughts?

[Disco_Destroyer]

http://tahrir4gaza.net/

[Disco_Destroyer]

Is the West's siding with protesters a sign of where these revolts stem from or a declaration that 'We're better than them', or 'we don't do this at home'?

‘Day of rage’ spreads across Arab world

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/944724--day-of-rage-spreads- across-arab-world?bn=1

Rallies in the Arab world continued Friday as protesters push for democracy and government supporters vow to die before wavering. Here is the latest round up.

YEMEN

Tens of thousands of supporters and opponents of Yemen's President Ali Abdullah Saleh held rival demonstrations in the capital on Friday, in a test of support for the veteran leader's 32-year rule.

Protesters outside Sanaa University, repeating slogans which have echoed around the Arab world since the uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia, chanted: “The people demand the downfall of the regime.”

Muslim imam who led Friday's prayer urged protesters to step up their demonstrations “until the president has departed.”

“Every Yemeni is religiously and duty-bound to work to topple this regime,” said Imam Abdullah Fatir in his sermon, adding that Saleh “is a devil who has driven us to the stone ages.”

Shouts from the crowd of “Allahu akbar,” or “God is great,” accompanied his words.

BAHRAIN

Tens of thousands of anti-government protesters filled Bahrain's capital Friday in an attempt to boost pressure for sweeping political concessions before possible talks to end nearly two weeks of demonstrations and clashes in the strategic Gulf island kingdom.

At least two major processions sought to converge on Manama's landmark Pearl Square, which has become the focal point of the uprising pushing for democratic change.

Security forces made no immediate attempt to halt the marchers in an apparent sign that Bahrain's rulers do not want to risk more bloodshed and denunciations from their Western allies.

A senior Bahraini cleric says anti-government protesters will engage in dialogue with the government only if talks lead to clear results that achieve the demands of the people.

BAHRAIN – Reaction

• U.S.: A senior aide to President Barack Obama has told Bahrain's crown prince that the United States welcomes that government's steps toward a dialogue with protesters but urged restraint by security forces, the White House said Friday.

White House National Security Advisor Tom Donilon spoke by telephone on Thursday with Crown Prince Sheikh Salman bin Hamad al-Khalifa and “expressed strong support for the Crown Prince's National Dialogue initiative.”

TUNISIA

Thousands of people filled the streets of central Tunis on Friday shouting slogans and carrying placards in a “day of rage” against Muammar Gaddafi's crackdown in neighbouring Libya.

The protesters shouted “Gaddafi out!” and a witness said the demonstrators had dubbed the demonstration – the biggest in the capital in almost a week – their “day of rage.”

Military helicopters circled overhead while security forces eyed the crowd, which formed in defiance of a government ban on demonstrations since Tunisia's revolution toppled Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali on Jan. 14.

JORDAN

The leader of Jordan's largest opposition group, Hamza Mansour, on Friday urged quicker steps to give Jordanians a bigger say in politics and to have them elect their prime minister — now selected by King Abdullah II.

Mansour spoke to 4,000 Jordanian protesters, the largest crowd yet to take to the streets of downtown Amman for the pro-reform cause. Jordanians have now been holding protests for eight consecutive Fridays.

He said that Jordanians were “proud” of their peers who have rebelled against their autocratic governments in Tunisia, Egypt and Algeria. Protesters also demanded new elections.

EGYPT

Tens of thousands of people are rallying in Cairo's Tahrir Square to keep up pressure on Egypt's military rulers to carry out reforms.

The downtown square, site of Friday's gathering, was the focus of an 18-day uprising that brought down President Hosni Mubarak on Feb. 11. The Egyptian military took control, but has assigned government affairs to a caretaker Cabinet until elections can be held.

Uprising activists say they are worried the army is not moving quickly enough on reforms, including repealing emergency laws, releasing political prisoners and removing members of Mubarak's regime from power.

They have vowed to stage large rallies every Friday until their demands are met.

IRAQ

Thousands marched on government buildings and clashed with security forces in cities across Iraq on Friday, in the largest and most violent anti-government protests here since political unrest began spreading in the Arab world several weeks ago.

In two northern Iraqi cities, security forces trying to push back crowds opened fire, killing six demonstrators. In the capital of Baghdad, demonstrators knocked down blast walls, threw rocks and scuffled with club-wielding troops.

The protests, billed as a “Day of Rage, were fueled by anger over corruption, chronic unemployment and shoddy public services.

“We want a good life like human beings, not like animals,” said Khalil Ibrahim, 44, one of about 3,000 protesters in the capital Baghdad.

LIBYA

At least five people were killed when security forces opened fire on anti-government protesters in the Janzour district in the west of the Libyan capital on Friday, a resident said.

In Tripoli, hundreds of protesters at the Slatnah Mosque in the Shargia district of Janzour were chanting anti-Gaddafi slogans, such as “With our souls, with our blood we protect Benghazi!” the resident said.

Another Tripoli resident told a Reuters correspondent in Benghazi that snipers in the Libyan capital were killing people.

The Libyan coastal town of Zawiyah was under the control of anti-government protesters on Friday, a witness said, bringing a popular uprising against Muammar Gaddafi within 50 kilometres of the capital Tripoli.

Tanks and checkpoints lined the road leading to Tripoli's airport, and security cordons went up around mosques where protesters might gather.

Young armed men, some wearing green bands on their arms in a sign of loyalty to Gadhafi, checked vehicles for weapons.

A Tripoli resident said people in the capital have received messages on their cellphones urging them to launch demonstrations after Friday prayers, and he said he expected thousands to comply despite fear of pro-Gadhafi militiamen who have been deployed on the streets.

“Let us make this Friday the Friday of liberation,” one of the messages read, according to the resident.

Gadhafi's son has vowed his family will “live and die in Libya,” according an excerpt from an interview to be aired on a Turkish television station later on Friday.

Asked by the interviewer if his family has a “plan B” in the face of the growing unrest in Libya and plans to leave the country, Seif al-Islam Gadhafi replied as he tapped his index finger into the palm of his hand: “We have Plan A, Plan B and Plan C.”

“Plan A is to live and die in Libya, Plan B is to live and die in Libya, Plan C is to live and die in Libya,” he said, pointing to a map of the country.

Rebels are in control of nearly all oilfields east of the Libyan town of Ras Lanuf, with fields and oil terminals still working at 25 per cent capacity, a petroleum engineer who is a member of Benghazi's interim leadership said on Friday.

LIBYA – Reaction

• U.S.: A U.S.-chartered ferry carrying hundreds of Americans and other evacuees has left Tripoli for Malta after being delayed for two days by high winds and choppy seas, CNN reported Friday.

In a news blog posted on the Internet, the U.S. cable television channel quoted a spokesman for the company operating the ferry as saying the vessel was bound for the island of Malta in the Mediterranean.

The ferry, carrying 285 evacuees including 167 U.S. citizens and 118 people of other nationalities, was originally scheduled to depart Tripoli on Wednesday.

• United Nations: The UN's top human rights official said Friday reports of mass killings of thousands in Libya should spur the international community to “step in vigorously” to end the crackdown against anti-government protesters in the North African country.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay implored the UN Human Rights Council to use all means possible to establish an independent panel to investigate the alleged abuses by Libyan security forces and hold those responsible to account.

• Britain: Britain is pushing for United Nations measures against the Libyan government, including asset seizures, travel bans and sanctions, Prime Minister David Cameron said on Friday.

Cameron said he wanted to send a warning to Libyan authorities over “appalling and unacceptable” violence against protesters.

• Greece: The bad weather forced Greece to suspend the evacuation of thousands of Chinese to the island of Crete on Friday.

• China: Rough seas stranded thousands of Chinese workers hoping to be evacuated Friday from the chaos in Libya. About 6,000 Chinese nationals were expected at Cretan ports Saturday, according to local officials and tourism organizers

• Italy: Two Italian military ships are off the Libyan coasts, near Misrata, but rough seas are preventing the evacuation of some 150 Italian workers.

With files from Reuters

[Disco_Destroyer]

Hmm perhaps to prolong the Dollar in the Middle East?

Robert Fisk on the Gulf 'ditching the dollar' in oil trade


Link

[Disco_Destroyer]

wow what timing!! Purrrrfect lol

Enough Speculating. Start A Revolution!!


Link


Stop with the counter-revolutionary speculation and the propping up of the globalist elites. Those who corrupt do not want a peaceful revolution.
So to all the truth groups and we are change chapters. To all the anti-war and human rights groups and to all activists and just good hearted people. Put the differences aside. Find your courage, unite, and make a stand against corruption.

Thank you for listening.

[Thermate911]

Thought you'd got carried away for a moment there ;-)

Here's a link to the ra-ra version:-
http://www.rys2sense.com/anti-neocons/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24467

but I prefer the clip from whence your sig line emerged:-


Link

[Disco_Destroyer]

'Gaddafi will fight on, 1000 dead in Libya just a beginning'


Link


Supporters of Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi appear to be turning their back on him while the international community unites against the bloodshed. The country's Interior Minister has resigned and joined the anti-government protesters, after reports of 300 unarmed civilians being killed in Libya's second largest city - Benghazi. He accused Gaddafi of planning a wide-scale attack on his own country-men. The Italian Foreign Minister told reporters that more than one thousand Libyans may have been killed in just eight days. The UN Security Council demanded an end to the violence on Tuesday, while the Arab League suspended Libya. The French president has called for EU sanctions against the country. Nevertheless, Gaddafi vows to fight till the death and die a martyr in his homeland. In his first major speech since the unrest began, the leader urged supporters to attack the opposition, who he claimed were bribed, drugged and 'serving the devil.' RT talks with the former MI5 agent Annie Machon.
RT on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RTnews
RT on Twitter: http://twitter.com/RT_com

[TonyGosling]

This is by John Leonard, Webster Tarpley's publisher.

A Mayfair Set-up in Egypt
I recently watched The Mayfair Set by Adam Curtis -
"Four Stories about the Rise of Business and the Decline of Political Power"
(not to say. corporatism or fascism:)
It's about how "market forces" (speculators) have taken the power over countries away from politicians, and increasingly so with globalization.
Thinking about the Middle East revolts in this light, and seeing Soros' hand in it, it's increasingly doubtful if there will be any betterment for common people from toppling a national ruler.
See
http://www.electricpolitics.com/2011/02/the_junk_bond_teflon_guy_behin .html
for the lowdown on Otpor, CANVAS, Soros, and other junk bond looters pushing revolution in Egypt.

So trying to explain the recent events in terms of US national policy interests is wide of the mark.
The marketeers just want a worldwide level playing field for their hot money flows and unrestrained speculative wealth accumulation. It's all about them getting even more rich and powerful. They have the technique of manipulating democracies down pat, and don't want to argue with any dictators.

On this reading, a program of worldwide color revolutions starts to make sense.
Perhaps the ultimate goal here is China -- to crack it open and recycle its wealth back to Wall Street.
Also Libya is a country with a very small population and lots of oil and gas -- big opportunities there.

http://www.progressivepress.com/blog-entry/mayfair-set-egypt

[TonyGosling]

Some interesting diagrams in the Mail today




Upwards: The price of Brent Crude oil has been rising since November

[conspiracy analyst]

From the European who had his citizenship revoked for supporting the last great wave of Arab Revolts an article explaining the concept of an Arab Nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Pablo
Michel Pablo
The Arab Revolution
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Preface
The current Arab revolution forms part of the colonial revolution that has been irresistibly developing since the last world war. This revolution, furthermore, is only one aspect of the accelerating and irremediable break-up of the capitalist regime, and consequently forms part of the proletarian revolution by which the end of the capitalist regime will be completed and the new socialist social order will begin.

The text contained in this pamphlet had as its purpose the opening of a discussion in the organized movement of the Fourth International on some fundamental aspects and problems of the Arab revolution as seen in its proletarian and socialist dynamic, i.e., independently of its present bourgeois-democratic stage, from the viewpoint both of immediate tasks to be accomplished and of its present leadership.

From this point of view, this text was conceived for a discussion among revolutionary Marxists familiar with the terms employed and the ideas developed therein. In order to render it clearer and more up-to-date, we think it useful in this preface to emphasize the following points:


The Idea of the Arab Nation
The notion of the Arab nation is based above all upon the criteria of language and historical formation, more than on geographic or economic unity. Given the diversity of the geographic limits and the historical peculiarities of the Arab world, the aspiration for Arab unity within the frame of a centralist state or of a federation is above all peculiar to the Arab revolutionary masses.

The Arab ruling classes are too heterogeneous, too bound up with local and regional interests, too marked by their particularist formation and their different links with imperialism, to blend without resistance, spontaneously and under their own impulse, into an organized Arab unity. Their present cleavages and oppositions are eloquently significant of the organic inability of the Arab ruling classes to attain Arab organic unity under their leadership.

From this point of view, the unity of the Arab nation will prove to be historically the exclusive result of the victory of the Arab revolution under proletarian leadership in its socialist stage. In the meantime, the particularist resistance of the Arab ruling classes, profiting by the regional attachments of the masses, will have to be faced.

These considerations do not at all have as their purpose any attenuation whatever of the historical reality of an Arab nation currently seeking its organic unity. They aim rather at emphasizing the fact that Arab national consciousness, as well as the aspiration for Arab unity, are characteristic above all of the Arab masses struggling against imperialism and its native allies, and that only these masses will be able to bring about the unity of the Arab nation.


The Problem of the Land and Agrarian Reform
Underdeveloped countries, the Arab lands are characterized by the predominance of an agricultural economy and a peasantry that is far the most numerous class in the population.

As a result of the facts that the decisive part of the cultivated land is in the hands either of feudalists (the Middle East) or of European settlers (the Maghreb), and that native small properties, whether individual or communal, are endangered by the competition of big properties exploited in a capitalist way and by lack of technical and financial aid from the state, the agrarian question in all these countries takes on capital importance.

For a radical solution it would be necessary not only that the lands (generally the best ones) of the feudalists and settlers be recuperated, hut that the state should also take dispositions to help the peasants – as individuals or as organized in collectives – to keep up their lands, improve their output, and recuperate new lands by various public works. That is to say, there would be needed, in addition to a revolutionary agrarian reform, a revolutionary state, which could not be other than the workers’ and peasants’ state.

In the absence of such a social solution, bourgeois agrarian reforms could not have any result other than, in the best of cases, to replace the class of native feudalists or the settlers by a layer of rich peasants who would easily dominate those peasants devoid of sufficient land and of adequate technical and financial means to keep it up in a competitive market economy.

This last-mentioned form of agricultural economy, which is currently prevalent everywhere in the Arab countries, has as a further result an irrational utilization of land – a situation which, under the very unfavorable climatic conditions of the Arab countries, soon ends up in the sterilization of production over vast areas of land.

The social consequence thereof is the speeded-up impoverishment of great masses of the peasantry, aggravated by the continued population increase.

To maintain the existent land in a productive state, and to include therein other arable areas, requires a state able to provide such an effort for the benefit of the peasant masses.

We thus fall back once more on the imperious need for a truly popular state, that of the power of the workers and peasants.

Concerning the forms that the agrarian revolution may take on, our text emphasizes the profit that it would have to derive from the continuance of pre-capitalist communal customs in matters of land ownership in the Arab countries, which might in certain cases facilitate the adoption, right from the beginning, of measures of collectivization rather than individual parcelling out. But this does not at all obviate the capital importance of giving the land or a life-interest in it to those who really work it and to win their democratic consent to any measure planned in this field.


Industrialization
In order to back up the agricultural effort and to solve the question of the unemployment of the great masses of the Arab countries, the industrial development of these underdeveloped countries must naturally be speeded up. The question of industrialization is also conditioned by the nature of the social regime. Without statification of the surplus value which the imperialist and capitalist firms, oil companies and others, are extorting from the Arab masses, as well as the land rent of the feudalists and the big settler owners, the question of the large-scale industrialization of the Arab countries will naturally remain insoluble. And yet these countries possess immense power resources (petroleum, sunlight) which, together with the financial resources and the abundant labor power formed by the majority of their currently non-productive populations, could rapidly solve the question of their industrialization on a vast scale.


The Question of the National Bourgeoisie
The classic bourgeoisie of the Arab countries is of trading origin and formation. It has historically developed a special trait – very important for its attitude toward the agrarian question and its faculties for an effective struggle against imperialism and especially against the feudalists – its role as a usurer toward the peasants.

It is wrong to believe that the peasantry is the victim solely of the feudalists. The trading bourgeois of the towns exploit the Arab peasantry, composed of share-croppers and poor peasants, in a way which, although more subtle, remains no less rapacious – whence the fundamental opposition of these parasitical layers of the bourgeoisie to a genuine agrarian reform.

The revolutionary proletariat in the Arab countries will not be able to carry out properly its struggle for the completion of the revolution unless it takes into account this reactionary nature of the commercial bourgeoisie.

It is true, however, that, side-by-side with this classic bourgeoisie, there are developing at varying degrees some still limited strata of an industrial bourgeoisie, which is trying to shake off the tutelage, stifling for its own development, of imperialism and the feudalists.

With these strata, temporary alliances for precise goals, which do not alienate the autonomous objectives and policy of the class party of the proletariat and the poor peasants, are possible and indeed necessary. But this party must at no moment forget that the goal of the industrial bourgeoisie is not the extermination of imperialism but a coexploitation of the native masses, a coexploitation pushed in the best of cases to an overturn of the present relationship between foreign capital and native capital, in favor of the latter. Next, that the struggle of this bourgeoisie against the feudalists also cannot go beyond certain limits, for the feudalists keep up various economic relationships with this bourgeoisie, which furthermore, by its nature (because of its weakness), does not at all want to support a decisive fight against imperialism and against the feudalists, by basing itself(necessarily in this case) on the revolutionary masses.

The crime of the past and present policy of the Communist Parties consists, not in their seeking under certain circumstances an alliance with the colonial bourgeoisie, but in their idealizing it – which prevents defining the limits of its progressive action and hinders the autonomous class organization and policy of the proletariat.

The examples of Nasser’s Egypt and Kassem’s Iraq are in this connection highly instructive.

In both cases we are dealing with a revolution that is bourgeois-democratic from the viewpoint of the immediate tasks to be accomplished, led by political staffs of national officers who ideologically represent what car, be called the Arab national bourgeoisie, i.e., the bourgeois strata which to a certain extent are opposed to imperialism and the feudalists.

These strata are generally those of the industrial bourgeoisie in the making. Both Nasser’s and Kassem’s regimes are, from the political viewpoint, Bonapartist regimes, of an unstable balance between the classes, while destined to cast their weight finally in favor of a single class.

In the case of Nasser, it is now clear that his Bonapartism is operating decisively in favor of the Egyptian industrial bourgeoisie. Furthermore, to the degree that the class struggle develops in Egypt and in the Arab world generally, and that the Nasser regime proves unable to solve the bourgeois-democratic tasks of the Arab revolution – viz. real independence from imperialism (with a real liquidation of all its economic after-effects), unification of the Arab nation, agrarian revolution, emancipation of women – the Nasser regime is turning against the masses and again drawing close to imperialism.

The true face of the Arab “national” bourgeoisie was unmasked on the occasion of the Iraqi revolution.

This revolution forms, at the present stage, the most advanced point of the Arab anti-imperialist and social revolution. Despite the fact that its official leadership is still assumed by a staff of “national” officers who would like to keep it within “Nasserist” (i.e., bourgeois-democratic) limits, the drive of the masses is infinitely more powerful than in the case of Egypt. This causes the Bonapartist character of Kassem’s regime to be far more strongly marked than Nasser’s, for Kassem does not have at his disposal a broad social base of his own.

In Iraq, because of the weakness of the industrial bourgeoisie, the hostility of the feudalists, and the successive purges of pro-Nasser elements in the army, Kassem has been seen to yield gradually to the pressure of the revolutionary masses, who form his real support against imperialism, Nasser, and domestic reaction. To the degree that the Iraqi revolution deepened, with creation by the masses of their own organs of dual power, including militias, and the increased politicisation of the expanding trade-union organizations, the social aspect of the revolution predominated over its initial national and anti-imperialist aspect.

These developments were far from pleasing to Nasser, hence his violent attacks against the Iraqi revolution and his spectacular anti-Communist and even anti-Soviet shift. This attitude, far from being accidental or personal, is in reality characteristic of the colonial bourgeoisie faced by the internal class struggle and the social problems of the revolution.

Khrushchev himself, disappointed and exasperated by Nasser’s anti-Communist and anti-Soviet attacks, was forced to stammer out a few elementary notions of revolutionary Marxist policy in the matter of the national bourgeoisie, but without drawing therefrom lasting conclusions defining a coherent line. Criticizing ‘nationalism”, i.e., the alliance, in colonial and dependent countries, of all classes, under the political leadership of the bourgeoisie, Khrushchev differentiates the struggle’s “anti-colonialist” phase, properly so called, from the social phase during which “the interests of different classes can possibly not coincide.” [1] “The attempts, by covering oneself with the banner of nationalism, to disregard the interests of the various layers of the population, and those of the workers, are inconsistent.” [1]

In reality the life-and-death struggle with the national bourgeoisie is inevitable in all cases where the revolution must be led from its anti-imperialist bourgeois-national phase up to its socialist proletarian social conclusion. The question is one, not of persons, but of classes.

From this point of view, it is not enough to criticize Nasser at a given moment, only to paint him in rosy colors at another moment, or to embrace Kassem, but to define a clear class line toward the colonial bourgeoisie which the Bonapartist regimes of both represent.

The now evident “betrayal” of Nasser was inevitable, inherent in the class nature of the colonial bourgeoisie confronted by the social deepening of the revolution. The “betrayal” of Kassem, to whom the favors of the Kremlin are now being given, is no less inevitable, in case the Iraqi Communist Party should prove unable to complete the revolution under its own leadership, backed by the country’s masses democratically organized in their committees, militias, and trade unions.

Kassem is only the super-Kerensky of the Iraqi revolution, i.e., the representative of a Bonapartist regime of an extreme fragility, which is trying to maintain a precarious balance between the revolutionary drive of the masses and the conservative and reactionary forces, still unable for the moment to go over to a counter-revolutionary offensive.

Under the rising pressure of the masses, Kassem is obliged to make progressive concessions, while resisting the social completion of the revolution and trying to stay within bourgeois limits. All the real gains of the masses – militias, trade-union organization, promises of a new emancipating status for women, etc. – are in reality the results of their struggles driving through Kassem’s resistance. His opposition to the legalization of the Communist Party and to the free political activity of the masses is in this connection significant of his limitations and class resistances.

At a later stage, in case of a retreat of the masses because of fatigue or disorientation the Kassem regime would try to annul some of these gains and to stabilize the bourgeois regime. [2]

The greatest danger now lying in wait for the Iraqi revolution is the Stalinist policy of the Iraqi CP. This party, the strongest of all the Arab Communist Patties, is at present torn between the tendency that is subject to the revolutionary pressure of its rank and file and of the masses, and the executive tendency that is docile to the Kremlin’s directives.

The former is instinctively seeking a class line, distrusting Kassem (and with good reason), and trying to base itself above all on the autonomous organization and action of the revolutionary masses. It is embodied, at the leadership level, by the party’s native cadres, who were formed in “the dungeons and the camps” of the old regime and remained steadily in contact with the masses. [3] But the dominant tendency in the leadership is represented by the hardened Stalinists formed in exile, in the USSR and the Popular Democracies, who subordinate the party 5 autonomous class policy to the changing interests of Soviet diplomacy. It is this tendency that gives Kassem unconditional support, that paints his regime in bright colors, and that calls for the disastrous Menshevik policy of the revolution by stages, Iraq allegedly needing to pass through a whole period of bourgeois-democratic development before there ripen the economic and social conditions that permit visualising the possibility of the socialist revolution under the leadership of the proletariat.

In case this tendency proves more powerful than the revolutionary pressure of the masses, the Iraqi revolution will inevitably experience defeat, either in the form of an overthrow of the present regime by the concerted and unexpected action of foreign and domestic forces, pro-Nasser for example, or else by the stabilization of the Kassem regime on a bourgeois basis.

The hope of a progressive development of the revolution lies only in the masses’ revolutionary dynamism, which might under certain conditions push the Iraqi CP beyond the limited goals of Soviet diplomacy, and make it outline a revolutionary orientation toward power.

The Kremlin is interested in the Iraqi revolution only in connection with its foreign policy, where it is a matter of utilizing the Iraqi trump card to bring pressure on Nasser and the imperialists. By this pressure Nasser might be prevented from being integrated in the imperialist orbit, while imperialisms such as England, which have great interests in Iraq and in the Middle East, might show more understanding toward for example the European goals of Kremlin diplomacy.

In general, the Kremlin is at present seeking, not to develop the social dynamics of the Arab revolution and to help it to victory under proletarian leadership, but simply to win the favors of the colonial bourgeoisie and to draw it away from coalition with imperialism.

In this way, as against ephemeral successes on the diplomatic level, as the experiment with Nasser once more clearly demonstrates, the Kremlin sacrifices the fundamental interests of the colonial revolution, which would be able to triumph only under proletarian leadership, in an inevitable and necessary struggle against the national bourgeoisie.

The criminal embellishment of the national bourgeoisie by the Kremlin and the Communist Parties at its disposal, whether it is question on any occasion of Nasser or Kassem, of Sukarno or Nehru, of Fidel Castro [4], et al., is at present the most powerful brake on the progressive development of the colonial revolution.

Once more, we repeat, it is not a question, in colonial and dependent countries, of avoiding alliances with the national bourgeoisie to the extent that it engages in an effective struggle against imperialism and the feudalists. It is a matter of considering these alliances to be temporary, to make them about precise goals of common action, to maintain the complete organizational and political independence of the party of the proletariat, to avoid painting this bourgeoisie in glowing colors, to prepare the masses ideologically for the bourgeoisie’s inevitable turn against themselves as soon as they begin the struggle in the field of the social deepening of the revolution, its completion on the bourgeois-democratic level and its socialist development.


Social Revolution and Unity of the Arab Nation
The social development of the Iraqi revolution soon raised a new question: what attitude to take toward Arab unity under present conditions.

Where it is a question of Arab states of the same social regime, the imperative need of Arab unification in a centralized state or a federation must have priority over the political nature of the regime under which the process of unification is carried out. But where it is a question of Arab states of social regimes that are different or are becoming so, the imperative need of unification must be subordinated to the necessity of defending the social conquests of the revolution, its proletarian and socialist future.

To take a concrete example: in the case of relations between Iraq and the UAR, it is certainly necessary to take into account the fact that the Iraqi revolution currently constitutes the socially most advanced outpost of the Arab revolution, and that consequently its gains cannot be simply annulled by just simply putting it under the whip of Nasser’s reactionary dictatorial regime – and this allegedly in the name of the highest interests of Arab unification.

But the Iraqi Communist Party, now the fierce defender of the country’s independence, should have justified the temporary subordination of unification to the imperative needs of the development of the social revolution in Iraq on the basis of quite other arguments than those it is at present using [5].

The Iraqi CP’s only justification for temporarily suspending unification with the UAR could in reality be only its determination to carry out the proletarian revolution in Iraq and to avoid compromising this process by subjecting it to Nasser’s reactionary regime, which Nasser, in case of unification, would spread throughout Iraq as well.

But instead of such an attitude, the Iraqi CP, nowise facing toward the perspective of the proletarian revolution, puts forward fallacious pretexts that compromise its cause and the communist cause among the Arab masses who ardently long for Arab unification: the so-called need of better guaranteeing the country’s economic (in reality, capitalist) development within the limits of Iraqi national independence, and the anti-democratic nature of Nasser’s regime.

We repeat: this last argument could be valid only if the Iraqi CP were setting up, as opposed to the unification demanded by Nasser, the need to complete the victory of the social – i.e., proletarian – revolution in Iraq. Otherwise, it is Nasser who is right in implicitly considering that, both social regimes being equal, it is unification that must take priority over the more or less democratic nature of the political regime.


The Algerian Revolution
If the Iraqi revolution constitutes at present the most advanced stage, socially and from the viewpoint of proletarian perspectives, of the Arab revolution, the Algerian revolution, at the other end of the Arab world, represents a no less important peculiarity of that revolution. In Iraq, the tone was set by the strength of the revolutionary movement of the masses and the presence of a Communist Party that has a real base and plays an important role in the revolutionary process. In Algeria, the lack of an important proletarian and communist movement is combined with an equally extreme weakness of the bourgeoisie and the resultant importance of the plebeian masses: poor peasants, agricultural and industrial workers, impoverished petty-bourgeoisie.

It is the cadres arisen from these masses and basing themselves upon them who are leading the present revolution under the banner of the FLN.

Despite the still essentially national-democratic slogans inscribed on that banner, the revolutionary strength of the plebeian mass movement in Algeria proves to be enormous and impressive. The Algerian people’s armed struggle has now been invincibly maintained for almost five years against the bulk of the military forces of one of the main imperialist powers of our century, which is trying with an unheard-of savagery to keep under its yoke Algeria, the key-country of its African colonial empire.

Never has the disproportion between the means utilised by imperialism and a small colonial country been so overwhelming; never has so broad-scale an attempt been made to exterminate physically the great masses of an oppressed people, in order to break its indomitable will to struggle. The atrocious colonial war of Algeria, which has unfortunately been going on up till now amid a shameless passivity on the part of the proletarian masses of France and of the so-called civilized capitalist countries, will be written down in history as the most sanguinary and infamous colonialist enterprise of imperialism before it finally leaves the stage.

Just the fact that under such unfavorable conditions the Algerian revolution, practically alone, continues the combat, growing more solid and profound, should be sufficient to justify not only the immense respect that the proletariat of Europe ought to feel toward its heroic Algerian brothers, spurring it to support them in their well-justified combat against imperialism, but also respect for the organization that began the revolution and was formed in the struggle itself, the FLN.

This organization, really a united front of diverse tendencies of Algerian opinion in the anti-imperialist struggle, is certainly not a homogeneous revolutionary party, and cannot within its present structure evolve toward such a party. But what is sure is that it includes all the valid revolutionary forces of the Algerian people, from which tomorrow there will emerge the cadres of the revolutionary Marxist tendency who will know how to lead the Algerian revolution to its complete victory.

The weaknesses which characterize and the dangers which lie in wait for the present leadership of the Algerian revolution should be neither covered up nor minimised. The lack of a precise doctrine, of a clear and precise programme, can lead the best-intentioned cadres of the revolution to become objectively servitors of a bourgeois, pro-imperialist, and anti-democratic cause, following the example of the Bourguibist leadership of the Tunisian revolution, or of the King of Morocco, of the Moroccan revolution.

The lack of a clear and radical social and political doctrine corresponding to the true interests of the peasants and workers who embody the Algerian nation in its struggle, means practising a policy that is in the final analysis bourgeois, with a future that will inevitably be “Bourguibist.”

The FLN would be unable to avoid such an evolution unless, starting right now, a coherent tendency within it should fight perseveringly to endow it with a precise and radical social and political programme and with a more definite and strict organizational structure that links it ideologically and organizationally to its militant base, especially the fighters and the Algerian masses of the interior, and their effective and permanent control.

It is of course not a question of fostering illusions about transforming the FLN in its present structure and entirety into a proletarian and socialist party. But what can and must be contemplated is transforming it into a transitional political formation by means of working up a definite programme and a structure that links it to its base and ensures that base’s control over it.

The programme must include a radical agrarian reform, the statification of the principal enterprises and means of production, the emancipation of women, the federation of the Maghreb and its confederation under certain conditions with the rest of the Arab nation of the Middle East, of Egypt, the Sudan, and Libya, the democratic structure of popular power (constituent assembly; people’s committees, which are already administering those parts of the country that are liberated or under de facto control).

Such control must include the transfer to Algeria itself of the principal organs of the revolutionary government and their attachment to the ranks of the fighters and the masses of the interior, while maintaining and developing delegations and various services abroad.

Only such political and organizational measures can effectively counteract the bureaucratic corruption of the leadership, fight against the trend to “Bourguibist” – i.e., pro-bourgeois and pro-imperialist – formations in the leadership, increase the flexibility of the organization of the revolution, deepen its close liaison with the masses, and inspire them with a new energy.

What is more, to the degree that the Algerian revolution makes clear its social and democratic aspect, it cannot fail to meet with an increasingly sympathetic echo among the popular masses of the other Arab countries, and even of European countries, including France, and its soldiers, workers and peasants in uniform.

The reactionary and barbarous enterprise of imperialism would appear in the eyes of the masses to be even more infamous as it struggles against the steadily deeper revolution of the Algerian people.

Even the conduct of the war, from the strictly military viewpoint, would prove to be modified by such measures, for the main strength of the Algerian combatants at the present stage lies in their mobility and their close fusion with the population. But whoever says mobility and close fusion with the masses is really saying social and political deepening of the revolution, rendering individual combatants conscious of their mission, and the masses conscious of the goals of the struggle and more and more involved in its victorious completion.

The possible generalization of the revolutionary war throughout the whole Maghreb would, furthermore, be enormously facilitated by such an orientation.

Naturally it is question here only of suggestions for a programme, a tactic, an organization, whose more precise details must be worked out by the revolutionary Marxist tendency of the great Algerian revolution.

The Fourth International considers it its duty at present to help unconditionally and unreservedly this revolution as well as the colonial revolution in general.

Conscious of the terrible lag of the workers’ movement of the advanced capitalist countries in comparison to the colonial revolution, it realizes that, in order to bring together and weld the joint between the two branches of the world revolution, political propaganda is not enough. There are needed acts of real practical solidarity with the colonial masses in struggle, now in the vanguard of the revolutionary assault against imperialism and capitalism.

MICHEL PABLO
June 1959



Notes
1. Khrushchev statements on 17 March 1959.

2. After this preface was written and was being set in type, Kassem started a trial of strength with the Iraqi CP and the revolutionary masses.

He is now trying to suppress the militias once more, and is proceeding to purges and even arrests of revolutionary elements. Kassem in his turn is taking Nasser’s anti-Communist road.

“Paradoxically, General Kassem’s strongest asset in the present struggle for power,” writes the British ex-cabinet minister Anthony Nutting in the 28 June New York Herald Tribune “is that the Communists have built him up to a position from which they cannot now tear him down.” (My italics.)

3. For this tendency, “what matters is the radical and immediate transformation of the social and economic structure” of Iraq. “It is the one that demands the nationalization of enterprises, the sharing out of land, the hanging of traitors, the purge of the army and the administration. It is this tendency that worries General Kassem. And it is likely that it is against it that the government is – in the shadows – furbishing its arms.” (Study by E Sablier in Le Monde of 28 May 1959.)

4. Fidel Castro is at present the latest “hero” discovered by the Communist Parties of Latin America, to whose regime they attribute the revolutionary gains of the Cuban masses. Fidel Castro, however, is only the Bonapartist representative of the bourgeoisie, who is undergoing the pressure of the masses and is forced to make them important concessions, against which his bourgeois teammates are already rising up, as has just been clearly shown by the opposition set going inside his own government against the – timid enough – agrarian reform.

5. As well as, for that matter, the other Arab Communist Parties, beginning with that of Syria, led by Bagdasche.

[Disco_Destroyer]

Interesting!!!! go to article for damning photo expose!

http://www.pakalertpress.com/2011/02/21/proof-middle-eastern-uprisings -fueled-by-us/

Proof! Middle Eastern Uprisings Fueled By US
Posted on Pakalert on February 21, 2011 // 6 Comments

Recycled revolutionary “props.”
Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer
Activist Post
First noted by geopolitical analyst and historian Dr. Webster Tarpley, some suspicious similarities could be seen between the Egyptian unrest and another, known US-backed uprising in Serbia. Serbia’s Otpor, or the “resistance,” was funded to the tune of millions by the US National Endowment for Democracy. Its signature clenched fist logo adorned flags, signboards, and t-shirts carried by the US State Department-laid Astro Turf until the ousting of Slobodan Milošević in 2000.
The exact same logo would turn up 11 years later across the Mediterranean Sea in the streets of Cairo, illustrating further the preposterous, foreign-backed nature of the Egyptian uprisings. Could it just be just a coincidence and Dr. Tarpley’s take mere speculative conjecture? Not even close.
After its success, Serbia’s Otpor would continue receiving funds from the West and become a “CIA-coup college” of sorts, under the name CANVAS, or “Center for Applied Non-Violent Action and Strategies.” It appears that after the Egyptian April 6 Youth Movement finished attending the US State Department funded confab in New York City in 2008, it would make a trip to visit CANVAS in 2009. From there, it took CANVAS’s “curriculum” and apparently their logo, and began assembling a US-funded mob in Egypt.
Amongst CANVAS’s current “partners” are the Albert Einstein Institution, Freedom House, and the International Republican Institute (IRI). The IRI includes amongst its board of directors John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Brent Scowcroft. When John McCain says “We should have seen this coming,” in regards to the unrest in Egypt, he obviously isn’t talking about himself since he helped make it happen.
See with your own eyes, the absolutely shameless hoax foisted upon you, the general public, by your corporate-owned mainstream media, the US State Department, and all the disingenuous leaders who have feigned ignorance and surprise over the premeditated and meticulously planned unrest still unfolding throughout the Middle East today, and NEVER believe a word they say again.

Serbia’s US National Endowment for
Democracy funded “Otpor”

Serbia’s “Otpor,” a model for future
US-backed color revolutions.

Serbia’s “Otpor.”

Serbia’s “Otpor,” US ready-made mob.

Serbia’s “Otpor” or “Resistance.”

Egypt’s “April 6 Youth Movement,” note the EXACT same
fist logo, most likely brought back from Serbia by April 6
members studying the CANVAS “curriculum.”

Egypt’s “April 6 Youth Movement” recycling
US-funded revolution “props.”

Egypt’s “April 6 Youth Movement” banner with painted in
Egyptian flag to give the “Otpor-fist” some local flavor.

Egypt’s “April 6 Youth Movement”
sporting yet another identical “Otpor-fist.”

Bahrain’s “Youth for Freedom” may have attended
the CIA-coup college as well. BBC’s canonizing of
Bahrain’s protesters as heroes surely indicates
establishment approval.

Egypt’s “April 6 Youth Movement” witlessly
displaying foreign funded propaganda as they
prepare to overthrow their country’s government
and make way for a Soros-funded constitution.

Egypt’s “April 6 Youth Movement”
banner with a slight variation.
A final note to consider is that CANVAS is on record in Foreign Policy magazine’s article “Revolution U,” assisting the “Rose Revolution” of Georgia, the “Orange Revolution” of the Ukraine, and is currently working with networks from Belarus, Myanmar (Burma) and 50 other countries. Taking a look at their activities and the overall globalist agenda, it is clear they are involved in regime change that will directly assist the globalists in their encirclement of Russia and China.
John McCain went on to say of the unrest his IRI had helped fund in Egypt, “I would be a little less cocky in the Kremlin with my KGB cronies today if I were Vladimir Putin. I would be a little less secure in the seaside resort [of] President Hu and a few men who govern and decide the fate of 1.3 billion people.”
McCain’s careless comments, begotten of either senility or the utter contempt he holds the general public in, let slip the true nature of the game being played out via US-fueled color revolutions unfolding around the world. Indeed, this is about exacting concessions and forcing the integration of sovereign nations into the Anglo-American, unipolar world empire.
Tony Cartalucci’s articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at Land Destroyer.

[Disco_Destroyer]

IMF Rates Up Dictatorships Just Before Revolutions By Michael Collins « Dandelion Salad
dandelionsalad.wordpress.com
‎... Further investigation unearthed a specific pattern of positive IMF endorsements for each of the nations experiencing popular uprisings that are sweeping the region. When the IMF blesses a nation’s progress for conforming to the economic policies underlying globalism, watch out! There is a popul...

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2011/03/04/imf-rates-up-dictatorsh ips-just-before-revolutions-by-michael-collins/

[conspiracy analyst]

IMF: Libya has $110 billion in foreign reservesDespite the freeze, the IMF estimates Libya’s $110 billion international reserves are sufficient to cover the country’s imports for three years.

Source: (AHN) Reporter: Vittorio Hernandez
Location: Tripoli, Libya Published: March 3, 2011 10:34 am EST
Topics: Unrest, Conflicts And War, Armed Conflict, Economy, Business And Finance, Macro Economics, Central Bank

Despite the freezing of Libyan assets by at least three western nations, the strife-torn nation has enough in its war chest to fund operations. According to the International Monetary Fund, the Central Bank of Libya holds at least $110 billion in foreign reserves.


The IMF cautioned it is unclear how much money is held by the central bank and on foreign shores. The Libyan government and strongman Muammar Gaddafi have extensive global holdings ranging from a Hollywood production company to an Italian soccer team and London property.

The U.S. has frozen $30 billion in Libyan assets, Canada $2.3 billion and the U. another $30 billion in a global bid to pressure Gaddafi to step down after 42 years of ruling Libya with an iron fist.

Despite the freeze, the IMF estimates Libya’s $110 billion international reserves are sufficient to cover the country’s imports for three years.

Because of the ongoing civil unrest in Libya, oil production dropped between 800,000 to 1.2 million barrels daily over the past two weeks to just 120,000 barrels a day, further crimping the flow of dollars to Libya. According to ENI, the Italian oil company that produces about one-third of Libya’s petroleum, the 120,000 barrels produced daily is not sold but stored.

The ongoing political strife in Libya is expected to last longer following Gaddafi’s pronouncement that he would fight the rebellion to the last man and woman. To show he meant business, the dictator launched a major ground and air assault on eastern Libya, which is held by the opposition.

The towns of Brega and Ajdabiya were the targets of fighter jet air strikes, even as Libyan ground forces battled rebels with heavy artillery fire. The air and ground attacks prompted the rebel leaders in Benghazi to appeal for international military intervention.



Read more: http://www.allheadlinenews.com/briefs/articles/90037610?IMF%3A%20Libya %20has%20%24110%20billion%20in%20foreign%20reserves#ixzz1FjfRdkUk

[conspiracy analyst]

The Arab Revolution Is Beyond America's Control

WASHINGTON -- It had to come. Where, when and how exactly one of many smoldering sparks in this agonized region might actually burst forth into the present conflagration was unknowable, but tension and anger was palpably rising over a long period.

Where all these uprisings across the region will go is still unknowable, but one thing is clear -- the imperative to break the long and ugly pattern of harsh, incompetent and corrupt rule that sucks optimism, hope and creativity out of these societies and made them breeding grounds for radicalism.

What the people of the region demand is to be able to take control of their own lives and destinies. But that in turn depends on an end to the constant external intervention of the United States in the region.

In the near term, the prescription is stark -- Washington must back off and leave these societies alone, ending the long political infantilization of Middle Eastern populations. We must end our incessant and obsessive efforts to intervene and micromanage the political life of foreign states based on a myopic vision of "American interests."

Today the Middle East is the last redoubt in the world of regimes bought, maintained and guided by Washington. Is it any wonder that this region is now the cauldron of numerous rebellions and anti-American expression?

And just why are we maintaining this damaging, hated quasi-imperial role in the Middle East? Is it for the oil? Yet what tin-pot dictator has ever refused us oil? Furthermore, we don't even rely that much on Middle East oil -- Saudi Arabia ranks only number three among our top five providers: Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Nigeria.

Or is it perhaps all about Israel? Yet why should that state constitute the seeming touchstone of everything that we do in the region? After all, Israel is overwhelmingly the most powerful military state in the Middle East, acts at will in the Middle East under the protection of American veto, manipulates our own domestic politics in its favor, and is now run by the most inflexible and ultra-right-wing government in Israeli history, while soaking up more American foreign aid per capita than any other state. The U.S. still backs Israel against the Palestinians in an Israeli occupation now into its fifth decade.

So given the new outburst of frustration, anger and violence, we still do not seem to acknowledge the need to change the narrative. Washington does not yet grasp the phenomenon of popular Middle Eastern will that now seemingly defies us everywhere. Our default instincts from Cold War days are still to grasp for a phantom "stability" at any price and prop up anyone who will be "pro-Western." Egypt is a "vital American ally," we hear -- but what does this mean? The ruler may have been bought, but the Egyptian people are not allies -- indeed they are predictably hostile to the status quo and to the powers that have propped it up.

We Americans believe that we favor democracy and democratization. But our government does not. We favor democracy -- but only when it produces the leaders and policies that suit our interests, not theirs. Democratization is always a punishment we deliver upon enemies, never a gift bestowed upon friends. God forbid that elections should turn up "anti-American" leaders -- whom we help to generate. And what does "anti-American" mean except a call for true sovereignty they have been denied?

Is our response to decades of anti-Americanism still to be more of the same? Are we incapable of finally acknowledging that free elections are required -- come what may? Yes, come what may, because angry people of the region may initially support policies we do not like. Ironically, it is the "anti-American" regimes of Syria and Iran that act most confidently in the face of Egyptian turmoil: Whatever the virtues of their regimes, they are perceived as truly sovereign and on the "right side" of Middle East anti-colonial history.

Yet we have been through this debate endlessly since 9/11. Why is there so much anti-American sentiment? No, it's not because "they hate our values." It's our lack of values in foreign policy they don't like, our hypocritical lack of commitment to democracy except when it meets our immediate needs.

We have tiptoed fearfully around Mubarak's death agonies in Egypt. Yes, reforms, but no regime change. God forbid, Muslim Brothers might end up in government. Yet it has been the very iron fist of the Mubarak regime that has helped make the Muslim Brotherhood the dominant opposition party in Egypt today. Like it or not, at this point in history Islamist parties do well all over the Muslim world; they have become the default opposition. Get used to it. They vary tremendously across a wide spectrum, from moderates to radicals, and include a small sliver of violent killers. These movements are constantly evolving. We must learn to work with the more moderate ones; that includes the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. They are not prone to love America, especially in view of our past policies, but the Brotherhood has eschewed violence for half a century and moves cautiously. If they occupy a major place in any new Egyptian government, they could well do with our help. And they will have to meet the political, economic and social demands of the people once in power: Anti-Americanism doesn't feed bellies or reform the social order.

America cannot go on riding the tiger forever in the Middle East. We cannot expect to have "pro-American" forces in power in the Middle East when the publics don't like our policies. We cannot continue our endless interventions -- out of fear that some states might emerge as anti-American. The world is sick of such meddling. We have to deal with the causes of why populations have become anti-American. And all this comes in the context of the rise of new powers with their own interests, and desire for clout in what they see as a new, emerging, multipolar global order. The costs are rising on our old patterns of imposing Pax Americana.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/graham-e-fuller/post_1694_b_819898.html

[Disco_Destroyer]

http://beforeitsnews.com/story/466/832/Will_The_Day_Of_Rage_In_Saudi_A rabia_On_March_11_Send_The_Price_Of_Oil_Into_Unprecedented_Territory.h tml

Will The Day Of Rage In Saudi Arabia On March 11 Send The Price Of Oil Into Unprecedented Territory?
Tue Mar 08 2011 05:47

[conspiracy analyst]

Israeli paper confirms Netanyahu ordered African mercenaries and now Gaddafi's son visits Israel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrZB-hasXf0

[Thermate911]

I remain to be convinced. Where is this paper? Who has seen it, outside of USuk/Israel 'authority figures'?

Why is it not being discussed openly at the UN? Why would a country that claims itself to be 'the only democracy in the middle east' support an alleged tyrant against the wishes of an apparent majority?

Why does the fate of Rosa Luxemberg spring to mind?

[Disco_Destroyer]

Maybe the revolts are alot more sophisticated than our press give credit?
Maybe they know the West can be brought down by Oil?
Libya is not the 1st and I doubt not the last to have Oil in the Crosshairs.

There she blows! Video of oil refinery hit by shelling in Libya


Link

[Disco_Destroyer]

BREAKING Nerve Gas used in Yemen on innocent protesters


Link

[Disco_Destroyer]

http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2011/03/americas-project-conquest-all-out- blitzkrieg-libya

see link for video

[Thermate911]

Another useful article on Libya from globalresearch:-

""Operation Libya" and the Battle for Oil: Redrawing the Map of Africa"

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23605 wherein the obvious is stated clearly:-

[Life]

Fascism is the corporatism of nation's civil systems headed by the Bank for International Settlements which now has every central bank on the planet acting not for the economies of each respective nation, but for the bloodlines who made the fortune which set up the fund which became the BIS.

Try nonconformist's of the silk spinning ilk and you see the meaning to the prophecies of Merlin as it speaks of the Worm...

They have held the centre of this web in London since the prince of Orange signed the charter for the Bank of England administered by the Inner Temple city but dictated from the John Adam Street complex on the Buckingham ley from the moment Durham House and all the history that went with it was replaced with the hell that was the addiction producing slave trading families headquarters today named Adelphi.

Secret Societies have become nothing more than secret Intel networks for the same, and as it relates to the nonconformist legacy we find Freemasonry to perhaps now hold the supreme office of administration for the committee of 300 and their merry slave trading Hamurabi coders.

Adelphi hides the shadow corporate crown web centre as they still parade as some kind of constitutional upholders from Buckingham Palace.

Trouble we face today comes in the form of the fact the shadow corporate empire of the British empire has taken control and is now busy finalising control over the worlds resources....

ARK is now the formulator and enforcer of the education of the Fourth Reich, through the RSA's Opening Minds and affiliated programming our children are being educated to accept eugenics as the backdrop to life, and guess which countries have suffered the new breed education :

Libya, Tunisia, Egypt.........

We are witnessing the results of this programming today on the streets demanding change without any idea of what they are doing, so sit back and watch because in five years time we will have a shed load of school leavers programmed to eugenics just like uncle Hitler...or should that be Cameron and his Legg.....

[Disco_Destroyer]

Hmmm?
Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt, Algeria, Libya, Syria- Change :0 Clearly France has been given Blessings now their Jets strafe Libyan skies :0 ‎... Saudi Arabia too, while tanks roll out to quash other lesser wanted Arab revolts!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7504214.stm

[Disco_Destroyer]

Things still may not go to plan

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/19/egyptian-crowd-attacks-elbaradei -at-voting-station/

Egyptian crowd attacks ElBaradei at voting station
CAIRO (Reuters) - A crowd of people blocked Mohamed ElBaradei from entering a polling station in Cairo on Saturday to cast a vote in Egypt's constitutional referendum, shoving him and smashing his car window with rocks as he left.

"We don't want you, we don't want you," a crowd of youths chanted at ElBaradei, who has said he wants to run for president.

He was shoved after joining a queue of people seeking to vote. He then returned to his car and stones were hurled.

ElBaradei, a retired United Nations diplomat turned activist, had led an opposition movement in 2010 calling for reform and an end to Hosni Mubarak's 30-year rule.

The Egyptian president quit and handed power to the army on February 11 after mass protests.

"I went to vote with my family and I was attacked by organized thugs holding referendum in absence of law and order is an irresponsible act," Elbaradei said onTwitter.

"Top figures of Mubarak's regime still at large and undermining the revolution."



Scenes of violence were common during voting when Mubarak was in power and elections were routinely rigged, but Saturday's voting was smooth and calm.

"This is a travesty. That people would stop anyone from voting at the first election we hoped to be free and fair in Egyptian history," said Nadine Wahab, a deputy campaign manager for ElBaradei who witnessed the incident.

Another witness, Sameh Fathi, 25, said he believed members of former ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) were behind the violence.

"They are obviously NDP, they came out of nowhere, they were not in line to vote and started chanting 'we don't want you' in unison...it looks like it was coordinated," Fathi said.

Other bystanders said they saw dozens of young thugs involved.

ElBaradei supporters said he would cast his vote at an unspecified location, rather than declaring where he would vote to the media as he had originally done.

(Reporting by Marwa Awad; Writing by Edmund Blair and Sarah Mikhail; Editing by Sophie Hares)

[Disco_Destroyer]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/14/france.eu

Love tops agenda as Sarkozy launches Mediterranean Union

Berlin saw the Sarkozy scheme as a means of splitting the EU while enhancing France's clout at others' expense. Gadafy stayed away, claiming to discern a revival of French colonialism in north Africa that would spark Islamist rebellion.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/4974756/Sarkoz y-announces-French-return-to-Nato-after-43-years.html

[Husq]

Apparently Tony Blair has called Colonel Gaddafi personally to ask him to stand down. The delusional lunatic went on for ten minutes about not being a war criminal...




...before Gaddafi could even get a word in

[Disco_Destroyer]

Ooh RT cutting people off :0

Bombs for peace? 'UN completely disgraced in Libya'


Link


Naked Aggression: 'Libya assault planned months ahead'


Link


Follow latest updates at http://twitter.com/rt_com and http://www.facebook.com/RTnews
RT talks to Stephen Lendman, a Chicago based radio host of a political talk show.

[Disco_Destroyer]

WEBSTER TARPLEY - THE WAR ON LIBYA 2011 IS ILLEGAL (1/5)


Link

[Disco_Destroyer]

Gadaffi and Mubarak Threaten Obama To End Peace Talks With Israel Over Settlements (Oct 2010)


Link

[Disco_Destroyer]

The plot thickens

http://www.thebarrychamishwebsite.com/newsletters/ziv.htm

The Barry Chamish Website

GENERAL ISRAEL ZIV AND LIBYA - ANOTHER ISRAELI FIASCO
by Barry Chamish
March 21, 2011


If you're a leader who is looking for an expensive means of losing power, hire Maj. Gen. Israel Ziv at his firm Global CST and he'll arrange for your downfall. Just ask Libyan strongman Muamar Ghaddafi for a recommendation.

Quoting reliable Israeli sources Yediot Ahronot and Inyan Mercazi, I recently, if not proved then strongly contended, that a desperate Ghaddafi hired Ziv's Israeli firm to supply him with a mercenary force to defeat the rebels' ragtag army on the verge of ousting him from power. Permit me to reprint my claims:

With approval from the government in Tel
Aviv, an Israeli security firm is responsible for sending groups of African mercenaries to Libya
to fight the protestors who have been calling for the fall of the Gaddafi
regime for the last two weeks, reports Al Jazeera's website, citing a source in
the Israeli press. The journalist from Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot, who
prefers to remain anonymous, said that according to speculation in the security
sector, Israel looks at Libya from a strategic perspective and in terms of
security. The fall of Gaddafi would open the door for an Islamic regime in
Libya, according to speculation. In a meeting on February 18, Prime Minister Netanyahu, Defence
Minister Barak and Foreign Minister Lieberman decided to recruit African
mercenaries to fight alongside Gaddafi, according to the journalist. During the
meeting, they decided to let General Israel Ziv, the director of security firm
Global CST, which is active in many African countries, to make a group of
paramilitary mercenaries from Guinea, Nigeria, Central Africa, Mali, Senegal,
Darfur and Southern Sudan available to Abdullah Assinousi, one of the heads of
Libya's intelligence agency.

Since then, details of the plot have emerged from the dark. Attending the fateful Feb. 18 meeting were Netanyahu, Barak, Lieberman. They heard assessments from IDF intelligence chief Gen. Aviv Kochavi and Chairman of the Division of North Africa in the Foreign Ministry, Shalom Cohen, that if Ghaddafi falls, a radical Islamic regime would follow him. Based on this unlikely assessment, the Prime Minister decided, supposedly on behalf of the Israeli people, to bail out Libya's leader with a well trained and equipped army of African guns for hire. He contacted Gen. Ziv who arranged a meeting with Ghaddafi military representatives in the Chadian capital N'djamena. Joining them were two reps from the Israeli government, former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami, and Gen. Yossi Kuperwasser. There, a deal between Israel and Libya was cut.

There should be no shock that Ghaddafi agreed. He had two choices; be overthrown or be saved by Israel. Naturally, he chose the latter even though the terms were tough. Global CST would supply tens of thousands of mercenaries for 5 billion American bucks. After they slaughtered the last of the rebels, Israel would be granted rights to explore and export Libyan oil hushhushedly and Gen. Ziv would be permitted to operate his army from Libyan soil to spread its unique talents at saving dictators throughout Africa.

Ghaddafi almost got his money's worth...and then a UN resolution and mostly an American force attacked Libya with bombs and missiles. Suddenly, Ghaddafi could and likely would lose. However, Ziv is not merely a maverick general:

http://nuestrosricos.blogspot.com/2008/04/israel-in-colombia-death-do- we-impart.html
General Ziv is on the payroll of Counterterrorism International and is member of the Task Force on Future Terrorism (FOTFF), created in June 2005 by the Office of Homeland Security of ­Israel? No, of the USA.FOTFF operates under the orders of then-Secretary Michael Chertoff and Lee Hamilton.

And if Ghaddafi should lose, the thoughtful U.S. Ambassador to the Security Council has requested that the mercenaries intervening in Libya be exempt from prosecution under international law. And if recent history is any indication, Ghaddafi is guaranteed to get shafted. Let's look at the last five years of Ziv's career:

In 2006, Maj. Gen. Ziv, heartlessly crushed the Jews of Gush Katif:

http://www.unitedjerusalem.org/index2.asp?id=625472&Date=8/16/2005
Col. Israel Ziv, a commander in Neve Dekalim, said about 500 to 600 families were left in the Gaza Strip, about one-third of the total population, and that he expected more to leave throughout the day. But thousands of pullout opponents who infiltrated Gaza in recent weeks also remained. Ziv said the army planned to clear out the southern half of Gush Katif, the main bloc of Gaza settlements, today.Amid anger among some settlers over the activities of outsiders who came to support them, Major-General Israel Ziv, operational commander of the general staff, said: “The outsiders have taken the locals hostage. I think that things will now move very fast.”

When told that he would be moving fast against teenagers, his infamous reply was that he would take that into consideration but he had his "limits."

After leaving 8500 Gazan Jews homeless, Ziv set his eyes on the former Soviet nation of Georgia. He armed the country and convinced it to start a war with Russia. Needless to say, Russia crushed the Georgians and were plenty ticked off at Israel:

http://www.infolive.tv/en/infolive.tv-27235-israelnews-how-israel-has- helped-georgia-train-troops-and-supply-it-weapons
IDF reservists who helped to train Georgian troops said Sunday that they had been unable to contact soldiers who they trained up until a few months ago, but declared that the recent hostilities came as no surprise. Speaking to reporters, the reservists said the bases used to train the troops had been bombed by Russia even though they weren't located in the area where the battles are taking place. One reservists identified as L told Haaretz that he was hired by Global CST, owned by Maj. Gen. Israel Ziv, and Defense Shield, owned by Hirsch, about a year ago, right after he left the army. He had served as a combat officer in an elite unit, and he got the adventurous offer through his commanding officers. "It looked interesting. Relative to Israel, the money was excellent, too," he said.

After betraying fellow Jews and Georgians, Ziv turned his sights on Guinea in 2008, training the troops of dictator Capt. Moussa Dadis Camara. By the next year, the Israeli-trained troops turned their new rifles on a soccer crowd, killing 158. Ziv’s benefactor, Camara, left Guinea for medical treatment in Morocco, and has not been permitted to return home.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/yossi-melman-defense-min istry-fines-firm-that-sent-elite-training-force-to-guinea-1.288559?loc alLinksEnabled=false

In December 2009 and January 2010, Haaretz published a series of articles describing how Ziv and former Tel Aviv police commander David Tzur, former foreign minister Shlomo Ben Ami, former deputy defense minister Ephraim Sneh, former Israeli ambassador to France Nissim Zvili and others got together in order to work in Guinea, a small, resource rich, West African country.

They got a ten million dollar contract, among others, to set up and train a special military guard for Capt. Moussa Dadis Camara, who seized power in Guinea and appointed himself president. The contract stipulated that Ziv would supply the force with gear and weapons. To that end Israeli instructors, who were veterans of the Israel Defense Forces and the defense establishment, arrived in Guinea at Ziv's behest.

And now, it's Ghaddafi's turn.

end

The Barry Chamish Page
(From Barry's web-guy, Steven Henry: If you're already on Facebook and want to subscribe, click the button at the top of the page that says 'Like' and that will subscribe you to get alerts when Barry (or his web-guy) posts updates. And, if you like what you read and hear - spread the word! Thanks! Now, back to Barry -)
http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Barry-Chamish-Page/203350319678743

Why I gratefully accept donations and why you might want to donate:
A 95-minute movie with 10 minutes of ads and a small popcorn costs $20. If you enjoy my articles for at least 2 hours this year, and you donate $20, you already received more entertainment than you did from the movie. The other 100+ hours of enjoyment you receive here is FREE.

Subscribers ($5 or $10/mo) and donors of $50 or more this year will receive weekly emails of exclusive world information upon request.

You have the immense moral satisfaction of aiding a poor dumb writer who seeks to inform, entertain and amuse you.

Without contributions, this work of mine would come to a crashing halt. Off the top of my head, the following have made significant contributions:

Baruch, Tova, Steven, Marc, Aliza, Ron, Karen, Bernard, Herman, Ari, Cindy, Jim, Marilyn, Peter, Christie, David, Lynn, Fred, Howard, Michael, Brenda and more. Thanks to them I manage to squeeze by...barely. Some months it's close right to the last day of the month. I appreciate and remember each contributor. Without you, there wouldn't be me.

Barry Chamish
POB 840157
Saint Augustine, FL 32080 USA

Paypal: chamishba@gmail.com

I have a radio show with a good listening audience. If you have something newsworthy to tell the world, contact me and I'll bend over backwards to put you on the air.

Listen to my radio show:
http://wwfar.com/mp3s/BarryChamish/

BE SURE TO LISTEN TO BARRY CHAMISH
Live TUESDAYS at 3PM PT / 6PM ET ON:
www.FirstAmendmentRadio.com

My new book, THE conPROMISED LAND can be ordered direct from the publisher http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback_book/the_conpromised_land/639877 7