Steven Gaal Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Unknown Snipers and Western backed "Regime Change" A Historical Review and Analysis by Gearóid Ó Colmáin (Global Research) ++++++++++++V++++++++++++++++++++ooo++++++++++++++++++++++V+++++++++++++ Unknown snipers played a pivotal role throughout the so-called « Arab Spring Revolutions » yet, in spite of reports of their presence in the mainstream media, surprisingly little attention has been paid to to their purpose and role. The Russian investigative journalist Nikolay Starikov has written a book which discusses the role of unknown snipers in the destabilization of countries targeted for regime change by the United States and its allies. The following article attempts to elucidate some historical examples of this technique with a view to providing a background within which to understand the current cover war on the people of Syria by death squads in the service of Western intelligence.[1] Romania 1989. In Susanne Brandstätter’s documentary ‘Checkmate: Strategy of a Revolution’ aired on Arte television station some years ago, Western intelligence officials revealed how death squads were used to destabilize Romania and turn its people against the head of state Nicolai Ceaucescu. Brandstätter’s film is a must see for anyone interested in how Western intelligence agencies, human rights groups and the corporate press collude in the systematic destruction of countries whose leadership conflicts with the interests of big capital and empire. Former secret agent with the French secret service, the DGSE(La Direction générale de la sécurité extérieure) Dominique Fonvielle, spoke candidly about the role of Western intelligence operatives in destabilizing the Romanian population. “how do you organize a revolution? I believe the first step is to locate oppositional forces in a given country. It is sufficient to have a highly developed intelligence service in order to determine which people are credible enough to have influence at their hands to destabilize the people to the disadvantage of the ruling regime”[2] This open and rare admission of Western sponsorship of terrorism was justified on the grounds of the “greater good” brought to Romania by free-market capitalism. It was necessary, according to the strategists of Romania’s “revolution”, for some people to die. Today, Romania remains one of the poorest countries in Europe. A report on Euractiv reads: “Most Romanians associate the last two decades with a continuous process of impoverishment and deteriorating living standards, according to Romania's Life Quality Research Institute, quoted by the Financiarul daily.” [3] The western intelligence officials interviewed in the documentary also revealed how the Western press played a central role in disinformation. For example, the victims of Western-backed snipers were photographed by presented to the world as evidence of a crazed dictator who was “killing his own people”. To this day, there is a Museum in the back streets of Timisoara Romania which promotes the myth of the “Romanian Revolution”. The Arte documentary was one of the rare occasions when the mainstream press revealed some of the dark secrets of Western liberal democracy. The documentary caused a scandal when it was aired in France, with the prestigious Le Monde Diplomatique discussing the moral dilemma of the West’s support of terror in its desire to spread ‘democracy’. Since the destruction of Libya and the ongoing cover war on Syria, Le Monde Diplomatique has stood safely on the side of political correction, condemning Bachar Al Assad for the crimes of the DGSE and the CIA. In its current edition, the front page article reads Ou est la gauche? Where is the left ? Certainly not in the pages of Le Monde Diplomatique ! Russia 1993 During Boris Yeltsin’s counter-revolution in Russia in 1993, when the Russian parliament was bombed resulting in the deaths of thousands of people, Yeltsin’s counter-revolutionaries made extensive use of snipers. According to many eye witness reports, snipers were seen shooting civilians from the building opposite the US embassy in Moscow. The snipers were attributed to the Soviet government by the international media.[4] Venezuela 2002 In 2002, the CIA attempted to overthrow Hugo Chavez, president of Venezuela, in a military coup. On the 11th of April 2002, an opposition March towards the presidential palace was organized by the US backed Venezuelan opposition. Snipers hidden in buildings near the palace opened fire on protestors killing 18. The Venezuelan and international media claimed that Chavez was “ killing his own people” thereby justifying the military coup presented as a humanitarian intervention. It was subsequently proved that the coup had been organized by the CIA but the identity of the snipers was never established. Thailand April 2010 On April 12th 2010, Christian Science Monitor published a detailed report of the riots in Thailand between “red-shirt” activists and the Thai government. The article headline read: ‘Thailand’s red shirt protests darken with unknown snipers, parade of coffins’. Like their counterparts in Tunisia, Thailand’s red shirts were calling for the resignation of the Thai prime minister. While a heavy-handed response by the Thai security forces to the protestors was indicated in the report, the government’s version of events was also reported: “Mr. Abhisit has used solemn televised addresses to tell his story. He has blamed rogue gunmen, or “terrorists,” for the intense violence (at least 21 people died and 800 were injured) and emphasized the need for a full investigation into the killings of both soldiers and protesters. State television has broadcast repeated images of soldiers coming under fire from bullets and explosives.” The CSM report went on to quote Thai military officials and unnamed Western diplomats: “military observers say Thai troops stumbled into a trap set by agents provocateurs with military expertise. By pinning down soldiers after dark and sparking chaotic battles with unarmed protesters, the unknown gunmen ensured heavy casualties on both sides. Some were caught on camera and seen by reporters, including this one. Snipers targeted military ground commanders, indicating a degree of advance planning and knowledge of Army movements, say Western diplomats briefed by Thai officials. While leaders of the demonstrations have disowned the use of firearms and say their struggle is nonviolent, it is unclear whether radicals in the movement knew of the trap. “You can’t claim to be a peaceful political movement and have an arsenal of weapons out the back if needed. You can’t have it both ways,” says a Western diplomat in regular contact with protest leaders [5] The CSM article also explores the possibility that the snipers could be rogue elements in the Thai military, agents provocateurs used to justify a crack down on democratic opposition. Thailand’s ruling elite is currently coming under pressure from a group called the Red Shirts.[6] Kyrgystan June 2010 Ethnic violence broke out in the Central Asian republic of Kirgystan in June 2010. It was widely reported that unknown snipers opened fire on members of the Uzbek minority in Kyrgystan. Eurasia.net reports: “In many Uzbek mahallas, inhabitants offer convincing testimony of gunmen targeting their neighborhoods from vantage points. Men barricaded into the Arygali Niyazov neighborhood, for example, testified to seeing gunmen on the upper floors of a nearby medical institute hostel with a view over the district's narrow streets. They said that during the height of the violence these gunmen were covering attackers and looters, assaulting their area with sniper fire. Men in other Uzbek neighborhoods tell similar stories . « Among the rumours and unconfirmed reports circulating in Kyrgyzstan after the 2010 violence were claims that water supplies to Uzbek areas were about to be poisoned. Such rumours had also been spread against the Ceaucescu regime in Romania during the CIA- backed coup in 1989. Eurasia.net goes on to claim that: “Many people are convinced that they’ve seen foreign mercenaries acting as snipers. These alleged foreign combatants are distinguished by their appearance – inhabitants report seeing black snipers and tall, blonde, female snipers from the Baltic states. The idea that English snipers have been roaming the streets of Osh shooting at Uzbeks is also popular. There’ve been no independent corroborations of such sightings by foreign journalists or representatives of international organizations.” [7] None of these reports have been independently investigated or corroborated. It is therefore impossible to draw any hard conclusions from these stories. Ethnic violence against Uzbek citizens in Kyrgyzstan occurred pari pasu with a popular revolt against the US-backed regime, which many analysts have attributed to the machinations of Moscow. The Bakiyev régime came to power in a CIA-backed people-power coup known to the world as the Tulip Revolution in 2005. Located to the West of China and bordering Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan hosts one of America’s biggest and most important military bases in Central Asia, the Manas Air Base, which is vital for the NATO occupation of neighbouring Afghanistan. Despite initial worries, US/Kyrgyz relations have remained good under the regime of President Roza Otunbayeva. This is not surprising as Otunbayeva had previously participated in the US-created Tulip Revolution in 2004, taking power as foreign minister. To date no proper investigation has been conducted into the origins of the ethnic violence that spread throughout the south of Kyryzstan in 2010, nor have the marauding gangs of unknown snipers been identified and apprehended. Given the geostrategic and geopolitical importance of Kyrgyzstan to both the United States and Russia, and the formers track-record of using death squads to divide and weaken countries so as to maintain US domination, US involvement in the dissemination of terrorism in Kyrgyzstan cannot be ruled out. One effective way of maintaining a grip on Central Asian countries would be to exacerbate ethnic tensions. In August 6th 2008, the Russian newspaper Kommersant reported that a US arms cache had been found in a house in the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek, which was being rented by two American citizens. The US embassy claimed the arms were being used for “anti-terrorism” exercises. However, this was not confirmed by Kyrgyz authorities. [8] Covert US military support to terrorist groups in the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia proved to be an effective strategy in creating the conditions for “humanitarian” bombing in 1999. An effective means of keeping the government in Bishkek firmly on America’s side would be to insist on a US and European presence in the country to help “protect” the Uzbek minority. Military intervention similar to that in the former Yugoslavia by the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe has already been advocated by the New York Times, whose misleading article on the riots on June 24th 2010 has the headline “Kyrgyzstan asks European Security Body for Police Teams”. The article is misleading as the headline contradicts the actual report which cites a Kyrgyz official stating: “A government spokesman said officials had discussed an outside police presence with the O.S.C.E., but said he could not confirm that a request for a deployment had been made.” There is no evidence in the article of any request by the Kyrgyz government for military intervention. In fact, the article presents much evidence to the contrary. However, before the reader has a chance to read the explanation of the Kyrgyz government, the New York Times’ writer presents the now all too horribly familiar narrative of oppressed peoples begging the West to come and bomb or occupy their country: “Ethnic Uzbeks in the south have clamored for international intervention. Many Uzbeks said they were attacked in their neighborhoods not only by civilian mobs, but also by the Kyrgyz military and police officers”[9] Only towards the end of the article do we find out that the Kyrgyz authorities blamed the US-backed dictator for fomenting ethnic violence in the country, through the use of Islamic jihadists in Uzbekistan. This policy of using ethnic tension to create an environment of fear in order to prop up an extremely unpopular dictatorship, the policy of using Islamic Jihadism as a political tool to create what former US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Bzrezinski called “ an arc of crisis”, ties in well with the history of US involvement in Central Asia from the creation of Al Qaida in Afghanistan in 1978 to the present day. Again, the question persists, who were the “unknown snipers” terrorizing the Uzbek population, where did their weapons come from and who would benefit from ethnic conflict in Central Asia’s geopolitical hotspot? Tunisia January 2011 On January 16th 2011, CNN reported that ‘’armed gangs’’ were fighting Tunisian security forces. [10] Many of the murders committed throughout the Tunisian uprising were by “unknown snipers”. There were also videos posted on the internet showing Swedish nationals detained by Tunisian security forces. The men were clearly armed with sniper rifles. Russia Today aired the dramatic pictures.[11] In spite of articles by professor Michel Chossudovsky, William Engdahl and others showing how the uprisings in North Africa were following the patterns of US backed people-power coups rather than genuinely popular revolutions, left wing parties and organizations continued to believe the version of events presented to them by Al Jazeera and the mainstream press. Had the left taken a left from old Lenin’s book they would have transposed his comments on the February/March revolution in Russia thus: “The whole course of events in the January/February Revolution clearly shows that the British, French and American embassies, with their agents and “connections”,… directly organized a plot.. in conjunction with a section of the generals and army and Tunisian garrison officers, with the express object of deposing Ben Ali” What the left did not understand is that sometimes it is necessary for imperialism to overthrow some of its clients. A suitable successor to Ben Ali could always be found among the feudalists of the Muslim Brotherhood who now look likely to take power. In their revolutionary sloganeering and arrogant insistence that the events in Tunisia and Egypt were “spontaneous and popular uprisings” they committed what Lenin identified as the most dangerous sins in a revolution, namely, the substitution of the abstract for the concrete. In other words, left wing groups were simply fooled by the sophistication of the Western backed “Arab Spring” events. That is why the violence of the demonstrators and in particular the widespread use of snipers possibly linked to Western intelligence was the great unthought of the Tunisian uprising. The same techniques would be used in Libya a few weeks later, forcing the left to back track and modifiy its initial enthusiasm for the CIA’s “Arab Spring”. When we are talking about the" left" here, we are referring to genuine left wing parties, that is to say, parties who supported the Great People’s Socialist Libyan Arab Jamahirya in their long and brave fight against Western imperialism, not the infantile petty bourgeois dupes who supported NATO’s Benghazi terrorists. The blatant idiocy of such a stance should be crystal clear to anyone who understands global politics and class struggle. Egypt 2011 On October 20th 2011, the Telegraph newspaper published an article entitled, “Our brother died for a better Egypt”. According to the Telegraph, Mina Daniel, an anti-government activist in Cairo, had been ‘shot from an unknown sniper, wounding him fatally in the chest” Inexplicably, the article is no longer available on the Telegraph’s website for online perusal. But a google search for ‘Egypt, unknown sniper, Telegraph’ clearly shows the above quoted explanation for Mina Daniel’s death. So, who could these “unknown snipers’’ be? On February 6th Al Jazeera reported that Egyptian journalist Ahmad Mahmoud was shot by snipers as he attempted to cover classes between Egyptian security forces and protestors. Referring to statements made by Mahmoud’s wife Enas Abdel-Alim, the Al Jazeera article insinuates that Mahmoud may have been killed by Egyptian security forces: “Abdel-Alim said several eyewitnesses told her a uniformed police captain with Egypt's notorious Central Security forces yelled at her husband to stop filming. Before Mahmoud even had a chance to react, she said, a sniper shot him.” [12] While the Al Jazeera article advances the theory that the snipers were agents of the Mubarak regime, their role in the uprising still remains a mystery. Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based television stations owned by the Emir Hamid Bin Khalifa Al Thani, played a key role in provoking protests in Tunisia and Egypt before launching a campaign of unmitigated pro-NATO war propaganda and lies during the destruction of Libya. The Qatari channel been a central participant in the current covert war waged by NATO agencies and their clients against the Republic of Syria. Al Jazeera’s incessant disinformation against Libya and Syria resulted in the resignation of several prominent journalists such as Beirut station chief Ghassan Bin Jeddo[13] and senior Al Jazeera executive Wadah Khanfar who was forced to resign after a wikileaks cable revealed he was a co-operating with the Central Intelligence Agency.[14] Many people were killed during the US-backed colour revolution in Egypt. Although, the killings have been attributed to former US semi-client Hosni Mubarak, the involvement of Western intelligence cannot be ruled out. However, it should be pointed out that the role of unknown snipers in mass demonstrations remains complex and multi-faceted and therefore one should not jump to conclusions. For example, after the Bloody Sunday massacre(Domhnach na Fola) in Derry, Ireland 1972, where peaceful demonstrators were shot dead by the British army, British officials claimed that they had come under fire from snipers. But the 30 year long Bloody Sunday inquiry subsequently proved this to be false. But the question persists once more, who were the snipers in Egypt and whose purposes did they serve? Libya 2011 During the destabilization of Libya, a video was aired by Al Jazeera purporting to show peaceful “pro-democracy” demonstrators being fired upon by “Gaddafi’s forces”. The video was edited to convince the viewer that anti-Gaddafi demonstrators were being murdered by the security forces. However, the unedited version of the video is available on utube. It clearly shows pro-Gaddafi demonstrators with Green flags being fired upon by unknown snipers. The attribution of NATO-linked crimes to the security forces of the Libyan Jamahirya was a constant feature of the brutal media war waged against the Libyan people. [15] Syria 2011 The people of Syria have been beset by death squads and snipers since the outbreak of violence there in March. Hundreds of Syrian soldiers and security personnel have been murdered, tortured and mutilated by Salafist and Muslim Brotherhood militants. Yet the international media corporations continue to spread the pathetic lie that the deaths are the result Bachar Al Assad’s dictatorship. When I visited Syria in April of this year, I personally encountered merchants and citizens in Hama who told me they had seen armed terrorists roaming the streets of that once peaceful city, terrorizing the neighbourhood. I recall speaking to a fruit seller in the city of Hama who spoke about the horror he had witnessed that day. As he described the scenes of violence to me, my attention was arrested by a newspaper headline in English from the Washington Post shown on Syrian television: “CIA backs Syrian opposition”. The Central Intelligence Agency provides training and funding for groups who do the bidding of US imperialist interests. The history of the CIA shows that backing opposition forces means providing them with arms and finance, actions illegal under international law. A few days later, while at a hostel in the ancient, cultured city of Aleppo, I spoke to a Syrian business man and his family. The business man ran many hotels in the city and was pro-Assad. He told me that he used to watch Al Jazeera television but now had doubts about their honesty. As we conversed, the Al Jazeera television in the background showed scenes of Syrian soldiers beating and torturing protestors. “ Now if that is true, it is simply unacceptable” he said. It is sometimes impossible to verify whether the images shown on television are true or not. Many of the crimes attributed to the Syrian army have been committed by the armed gangs, such as the dumping of mutilated bodies into the river in Hama, presented to the world as more proof of the crimes of the Assad regime. There is a minority of innocent opponents of the Assad regime who believe everything they see and hear on Al Jazeera and the other pro-Western satellite stations. These people simply do not understand the intricacies of international politics. But the facts on the ground show that most people in Syria support the government. Syrians have access to all internet websites and international TV channels. They can watch BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, read the New York Times online or Le Monde before tuning into their own state media. In this respect, many Syrians are more informed about international politics than the average European or American. Most Europeans and American believe their own media. Few are capable of reading the Syrian press in original Arabic or watching Syrian television. The Western powers are the masters of discourse, who own the means of communication. The Arab Spring has been the most horrifying example of the wanton abuse of this power. Disinformation is effective in sowing the seeds of doubt among those who are seduced by Western propaganda. Syrian state media has disproved hundreds of Al Jazeera lies since the beginning of this conflict. Yet the western media has refused to even report the Syrian government’s position lest fair coverage of the other side of this story encourage a modicum of critical thought in the public mind. Conclusion. The use of mercenaries, death squads and snipers by Western intelligence agencies is well documented. No rational government attempting to stay in power would resort to unknown snipers to intimidate its opponents. Shooting at innocent protestors would be counterproductive in the face of unmitigated pressure from Western governments determined to install a client regime in Damascus. Shooting of unarmed protestors is only acceptable in dictatorships that enjoy the unconditional support of Western governments such as Bahrain, Honduras or Colombia. A government which is so massively supported by the population of Syria would not sabotage its own survival by setting snipers against the protests of a small minority. The opposition to the Syrian regime is, in fact, miniscule. Tear gas, mass arrests and other non lethal methods would be perfectly sufficient for a government wishing to control unarmed demonstrators. Snipers are used to create terror, fear and anti-regime propaganda. They are an integral feature of Western sponsored regime change. If one were to make a serious criticism of the Syrian government over the past few months, it is that they have failed to implement effective anti-terrorism measures in the country. The Syrian people want troops on the streets and the roofs of public buildings. In the weeks and months ahead, the Syrian armed forces will probably rely more and more on their Russian military specialists to strengthen the country's defenses as the Western crusade begun in Libya in March spreads to the Levant. There is no conclusive proof that the snipers murdering men, women and children in Syria are the agents of Western imperialism. But there is overwhelming proof that Western imperialism is attempting to destroy the Syrian state. As in Libya, they have never once mentioned the possibility of negotiations between the so-called opposition and the Syrian government. The West wants regime change and is determined to repeat the slaughter in Libya to achieve this geopolitical objective. It now looks likely that the cradle of civilization and science will be overrun by semi-literate barbarians as the terminal decline of the West plays itself out in the deserts of the East. Notes [1] http://nstarikov.ru/en/ [2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l8qjX4SzBY&feature=related [3]http://www.euractiv.com/enlargement/romania-says-poverty-reduction-impossible-target-news-468172 [4]http://www.truthinmedia.org/Bulletins/tim98-3-10.html [5].http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2010/0412/Thailand-s-red-shirt-protests-darken-with-unknown-snipers-parade-of-coffins [6] http://www.activistpost.com/2010/12/thailand-stage-set-for-another-color.html [7] http://www.eurasianet.org/taxonomy/term/2813?page=6 [8http://kommersant.com/p1008364/r_500/U.S.-Kyrgyzstan_relations/ [9] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/world/asia/25kyrgyz.html [10]http://articles.cnn.com/2011-01-16/world/tunisia.protests_1_troops-battle-unity-government-tunisia?_s=PM:WORLD [11]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIFxqXPQEQU&feature=related [12]http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/spotlight/anger-in-egypt/2011/02/201126201341479784.html [13] http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4060180,00.html [14] http://intelligencenews.wordpress.com/2011/09/21/01-828/ [15] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQtM-59jDAo&feature=player_embedded#! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) Steven, Why do you read and post such garbage. It's not an historical review or analysis in any sense of the word. Here's a guy who says that imperialists western nations intentionally sparked the "CIA's Arab Spring" in Tunisia - not with the self immolation of Mohamid Bouazzi, as we know it began, but with anonymous snipers. And they aren't anonymous, they are clearly well paid and highly trained national army snipers - in the case of Libya, some of them women. The women snipers of Sirte made many martyrs, some were captured alive. This guy tries to give his article some legitimacy with footnotes, but he acknowledges - "None of these reports have been independently investigatedor corroborated. It is therefore impossible to draw any hard conclusions fromthese stories." And his failed marxist ideology is apparent and his loyalities are to tyrants - "When we are talking about the" left" here, we arereferring to genuine left wing parties, that is to say, parties who supportedthe Great People's Socialist Libyan Arab Jamahirya in their long and brave fight against Western imperialism, not the infantile petty bourgeois dupes who supported NATO's Benghazi terrorists. The blatant idiocy of such a stanceshould be crystal clear to anyone who understands global politics and class struggle." Well we do recognize the blatant idiocy of such thinking - and now the NATO Benghazi terrorists are in control. Then he moves on to Syria, where he says most of the people "support the government," which is blatantly untrue, and the government snipers have been picking off an average of a dozen people a day. The only thing he says that is remotely reliable is that Al Jezeera is owned and controlled by Qatar, but he doesn't mention they have refused to promote the revolution in Bahrain because they're pals with the dictator there. They're selective about which dictators they like and don't like. While I don't know about his other examples - his references to Tunisia, Libya and Syria are just the opposite of the truth, so I assume that his other examples are just as wrong. A really good essay on the use of snipers in the Regional Arab Revolutions has yet to be written. The guy claims to be Irish, and even gives the example of Bloody Sunday, but he's not Irish, he's an Idiot. And by the way, two women with duel Irish-Libyan citizenship have been appointed to the new Revolutionary Cabinet - as Ministers of Health and Education. Libya's PM chooses secularist candidates for cabinet posts - The Irish Times - Wed, Nov 23, 2011 And all these so-called "Leftists" who claim that al Qaeda and radical islamics have taken over Libya, say that the dictators were good for fighting these terrorists, don't realize that you can't put freedom back in the gene jar. BK Revolutionary Program Edited November 29, 2011 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Steven, Why do you read and post such garbage. It's not an historical review or analysis in any sense of the word. Here's a guy who says that imperialists western nations intentionally sparked the "CIA's Arab Spring" in Tunisia - not with the self immolation of Mohamid Bouazzi, as we know it began, but with anonymous snipers.... Bill, You post at least several times in several threads, as if you have a vested stake in this controversy which you seem not to accept as even potentially controversial. "We" do not KNOW it began with the self immolation of Bouazizi. How would it harm you to embrace a healthy skepticism in this controversy, how does it help you to be so insistent about the importance of Bouazizi in the origins of the overthrow of the Tunisian government? Why can Bouazizi not be only a catalyst fanning the flames of a fire ingited earlier by unknown actors? Is it not possible that Bouazizi was as described in the BBC piece I've quoted from? http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/11/tunisia-arab-allies-political-freedomTunisia, our supposedly stable 'friend' The west's search for Arab allies should not be at the cost of support for political freedom within those countries Rachel Linn - guardian.co.uk, Thursday 11 November 2010 ....The common view from outside is that Tunisia is stable. Because Ben Ali's government has provided economic growth and avoided the violence of neighbouring Algeria, most Tunisians supposedly have acquiesced to the exchange of political freedom for economic and personal security. This view also forms the basis of a rather meagre argument from Tunisia's allies as to why they are not more critical of the regime. Essentially, Tunisia is not creating any headaches for the west, and – in the post-9/11 international order – can be relied upon as a western-friendly Arab regime that will co-operate on security. But that does not mean this surface-level "stability" runs very deep. Most Tunisians I spoke to expressed real apprehension about the future. Though Tunisia's GDP grew steadily between the late 1980s and the mid-2000s, growth has slowed in recent years and unemployment has risen sharply. Economists suggest the actual (unpublished) rate of unemployment is around 25%, and possibly as high as 40% in the critical 18-25 age group. With ever-fewer outlets for discontented individuals to express their views, many fear the outcome could be a "national drama", in which the west would be seen as complicit for not pressuring the regime to limit itself.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-1380049316 June 2011 Last updated at 20:56 ET Doubt over Tunisian 'martyr' who triggered revolution Wyre Davies By Wyre Davies BBC News, Tunis ...It seems that for some Tunisians, the 26-year-old martyr is no longer a political hero but a media creation, manufactured for the convenience of those - outsiders - who wax lyrical about the birth of the Arab Spring.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted November 29, 2011 Author Share Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) Steven, Why do you read and post such garbage. It's not an historical review or analysis in any sense of the word. Here's a guy who says that imperialists western nations intentionally sparked the "CIA's Arab Spring" in Tunisia - not with the self immolation of Mohamid Bouazzi, as we know it began, but with anonymous snipers.... Bill, You post at least several times in several threads, as if you have a vested stake in this controversy which you seem not to accept as even potentially controversial. "We" do not KNOW it began with the self immolation of Bouazizi. How would it harm you to embrace a healthy skepticism in this controversy, how does it help you to be so insistent about the importance of Bouazizi in the origins of the overthrow of the Tunisian government? Why can Bouazizi not be only a catalyst fanning the flames of a fire ingited earlier by unknown actors? Is it not possible that Bouazizi was as described in the BBC piece I've quoted from? http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/11/tunisia-arab-allies-political-freedomTunisia, our supposedly stable 'friend' The west's search for Arab allies should not be at the cost of support for political freedom within those countries Rachel Linn - guardian.co.uk, Thursday 11 November 2010 ....The common view from outside is that Tunisia is stable. Because Ben Ali's government has provided economic growth and avoided the violence of neighbouring Algeria, most Tunisians supposedly have acquiesced to the exchange of political freedom for economic and personal security. This view also forms the basis of a rather meagre argument from Tunisia's allies as to why they are not more critical of the regime. Essentially, Tunisia is not creating any headaches for the west, and in the post-9/11 international order can be relied upon as a western-friendly Arab regime that will co-operate on security. But that does not mean this surface-level "stability" runs very deep. Most Tunisians I spoke to expressed real apprehension about the future. Though Tunisia's GDP grew steadily between the late 1980s and the mid-2000s, growth has slowed in recent years and unemployment has risen sharply. Economists suggest the actual (unpublished) rate of unemployment is around 25%, and possibly as high as 40% in the critical 18-25 age group. With ever-fewer outlets for discontented individuals to express their views, many fear the outcome could be a "national drama", in which the west would be seen as complicit for not pressuring the regime to limit itself.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-1380049316 June 2011 Last updated at 20:56 ET Doubt over Tunisian 'martyr' who triggered revolution Wyre Davies By Wyre Davies BBC News, Tunis ...It seems that for some Tunisians, the 26-year-old martyr is no longer a political hero but a media creation, manufactured for the convenience of those - outsiders - who wax lyrical about the birth of the Arab Spring.... VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVooooVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV* TOM,the same media that tells the world that the WC is a good report ,tells the world the Arab Spring will help the common man in the Middle East. BK cant understand this equation Rami Nakhle = NED = CIA (and of course CIA=DALLAS). See below re Rami Nakhle . THANKS sg ==================================================oVo======================* Media Lies Used to Provide a Pretext for Another "Humanitarian War": Protest in Syria: Who Counts the Dead? link http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27785 by Julie Lévesque =========================================oooo============================================================ According to numerous reports from the Western media, human rights organisation, as well as the UN, countless peaceful civilians have been killed by the Syrian forces since the beginning of the unrest in the country in mid March. But where do the numbers come from? Many media reports on the alleged deadly repression by the Syrian government fail to mention the sources of their information, which are very often referred to solely as "human rights groups" or "activists": "Rights groups said Sunday that troops cracking down on pro-democracy protesters killed eight people in northern Idlib province and four more in central areas near Hama. (Syrian Forces Kill 12 as ICRC Head Visits Damascus, Voice of America, September 4, 2011.) These protests are an unprecedented challenge to President Bashar al-Assad and his family, which has ruled the country for more than 40 years. The cost has been high: at least 200 dead, according to human rights groups, and many cyber activists have been jailed. (Deborah Amos, Syrian Activist In Hiding Presses Mission From Abroad, NPR, April 22, 2011.) At least 75 people have been killed today in Syria during mass protests, local human rights activists told Amnesty International [...] Thirty were killed in the southern town of Izzra, 22 in Damascus, 18 in the Homs area and the rest in other towns and villages, activists said [...] (Scores killed in Syria as 'Great Friday' protests are attacked, Amnesty International, April 22, 2011.) Although the necessity to remain "anonymous" where dissent is said to be life threatening may under certain circumnstances be understandable, this stance inevitably raises suspicions: The "'numbers" can be used to demonize the government, as part of covert operations by any state or organisation looking for regime change in Damascus. It is no secret that the overthrow of the Syrian regime has been a long-sought goal by several foreign powers, including the U.S. and Israel. The reliance of the mainstream media on information emanating from anonymous groups provides a biased understanding of the Syrian protests, which in turn supports the broader objective of destabilizing the Syrian regime. When information from unknown sources pertaining to the death toll is published either by a mainstream media or a recognized human rights group, it is invariably picked up and considered as "factual evidence" by other news sources or think tanks, without further verification. Moreover, in the process the information is subject to further distortion. Here is an example of this phenomenon: Rights group Amnesty International said on Friday that it has recorded the names of 171 people killed since the first protesters died in Daraa on March 18. The group based its tally on information received from rights activists, lawyers and other sources and said the majority appeared to have been killed by live ammunition fired by the security forces. (Protesters killed in southern Syria, Al Jazeera, April 9, 2011.) The above news article is based on the following statement by Amnesty International: At least 171 people are believed to have been killed during three weeks of unrest in Syria, Amnesty International said today after at least eight more fatalities during protests. The death toll from today's clashes could rise significantly, according to reports from human rights activists in the country. Amnesty International has recorded the names, via information received from sources including human rights activists and lawyers, of 171 people killed. (Death toll rises amid fresh Syrian protests, Amnesty International, April 8, 2011.) The original information from Amnesty international (AI) is that 171 people are believed to have been killed, a statement showing that although it has recorded the names of 171 people killed, this information could not be confirmed. Al Jazeera fails to report this "uncertainty" and by doing so makes it a fact rather than an assumption, that 171 people were killed. Here is another example of blatant distortion: Despite a pledge to end its crackdown, Syrian security forces continued to suppress anti-regime protestors, killing at least eighteen on Thursday in the city of Homs (al-Jazeera). (Jonathan Masters, Assad's Broken Promises, Council on Foreign Relations, November 3, 2011.) This is an analysis from the Council on Foreign Relations, the famous and extremely powerful U.S. foreign policy think tank. It is based on the following article from Al Jazeera where the information related to the killing is markedly different: "Dozens of people have reportedly been killed in the flashpoint city of Homs, as Syrian security forces bombarded residential areas with tanks. The reported deaths occurred in the Bab Amro district of Homs on Thursday, the Local Coordination Committees of Syria, an activist group monitoring the country's uprising, said. (Syria violence defies peace deal," Al Jazeera, November 4, 2011.) Al Jazeeras wording reportedly been killed and reported deaths shows the deaths have not been confirmed. The Qatari media also mentions that these claims come from one source only, namely from an activist group called Local Coordination Committees of Syria (LCC). The article from the CFR changed Al Jazeeras allegations into concrete facts. When it comes to counting the dead, the LCC is very often cited in the mainstream media as a source for reports on killings committed by the Syrian authorities, as we can see in the examples below: Another opposition group, the Local Coordination Committees, said it could not corroborate the Syrian Observatorys account of the military casualties, though it also called Monday one of the uprisings bloodier days, with at least 51 civilians killed. We dont have any confirmation of what theyre claiming, said Omar Idlibi, a spokesman for the Local Coordination Committees. (Nada Bakri and Rick Gladstone, Syria Faces New Threats as Opposition Seeks Allies, The New York Times, November 15, 2011.) According to the opposition network, the Local Coordination Committees, at least five people were killed during the military offensives -- three in the central province of Homs, one in the eastern border town of Tal Kalakh and one in Idleb along the Syrian-Turkish border. (Roula Hajjar, Syria: Activists report manhunt for defectors and protesters, Los Angeles Times, September 5, 2011.) Secret police opened fire and shot teargas to disperse more than 10,000 protesters in Deir Ezzour, in Syrias tribal east, an activist from the Syrian Revolution Coordinators Union (SRCU) told Al Jazeera. Ten protesters were wounded and around 40 were arrested, he said. The SRCU is the name given this week to one of Syria's grassroots opposition networks. The SRCU works alongside the Local Coordinating Committees (LCC), another grassroots opposition network. (Al Jazeera Live Blog Syria, June 3, 2011.) At least 2,200 people have been killed in Syria since the beginning of the unrest, by the United Nations count. An activist group, the Syrian Revolution Coordinating Union, said on Tuesday that 551 people were killed during Ramadan alone. The group said 130 others were killed on July 31, the eve of Ramadan, in an attack on the city of Hama, which was also the scene of a ferocious crackdown in 1982. On Tuesday, four people were killed in Hara and two others in Inkil, two towns in Daraa Province, according to the Local Coordination Committees, another group of activists who document demonstrations. (Nada Bakri, Syrian Security Forces Fire on Worshipers as Ramadan Ends, The New York Times, August 30, 2011.) The above article mentions a "UN count" as if it were an independent source of information. However, according to one of its reports, the UN also relies on the same sources of information, the LCC, and it mentions in a note that it is unable to confirm if the information given by the LCC is true: "At the time of writing, the mission had received more than 1,900 names and details of persons killed in the Syrian Arab Republic since mid-March 2011; all are said to be civilians [26] 26. This information is compiled by local coordinating committees active within the Syrian Arab Republic in documenting the names and details of victims. The mission is unable to verify independently this information." (United Nations, Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic - A/HRC/18/53, September 15, 2011.) What are the Local Coordination Committees (LCC)? According to the Christian Science Monitor, the LCC is part of the non-elected Syrian National Council (SNC). Even though most of its members are in exile and its members in Syria are unknown, the SNC is presented as the legitimate Syrian authority, and has been recognized by the National Transitional Council of Libya, another non-elected body recognized by Western powers as a "pro-democracy" representative of the Libyan people. "Syrian opposition leaders meeting Sunday in Turkey formally created the Syrian National Council, bringing together most of the disparate groups seeking to unseat Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The council includes the Local Coordination Committees, which has organized most of the protests across the country; the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood; and Kurdish groups; among others, the Associated Press reports. Almost half the members are from inside the country, according to the Washington Post, overcoming a key concern that the council would rely to (sic) heavily on exiles. (Ariel Zirulnick, Syrian oppositon groups formally unify, overcoming key hurdle, October 3, 2011.) The LCC are somewhat "anonymous". They refused a telephone interview, but agreed to answer some questions by email. They stated that for security reasons they could not reveal how many members the LCC includes, but claim 13 members of the LCC are in the SNC. We have enough people to run demonstrations on ground, for media and relief action. LCC Logo The members allegedly come from different backgrounds and are from all age groups; some are active inside Syria, the others outside the country. The LCC says that their members, in and outside Syria, have been threatened, arrested and tortured by the Syrian authorities. When asked how they became a source of information for the foreign media, the LCC says it is because they provide credible facts. And what is the ultimate goal of the LCC? Our goal is to change the regime in Syria, and as the first step, to end the mandate of the current President, who is now politically and legally responsible for the crimes committed by his regime against the Syrian people and a safe transfer of power in the country. Basically, the LCC wants regime change in Syria and it seems to be the major source of information for the western mainstream media and human rights organizations. This opposition group claims to provide credible facts, however there is no way to verify these facts. The so-called facts could well be propaganda intended to discredit the actual regime and galvanize public opinion in favour of the regime change the group aspires to implement. Although the LCC spokesperson refused to disclose the names of its members, some have appeared in the mainstream media. One of their members, or collaborator, is Rami Nakhle, a cyberactivist living in exile in Beirut, Lebanon. Today, after 98 days of protests, he is living in denial, says Rami Nakhle, a Syrian working in Beirut with the Local Coordination Committees, a clearinghouse for Syrian opposition protests and activities It has become clear to everybody that Bashar al-Assad cannot change. He doesnt realize that Syria has changed forever but hes still the same president we heard last time, in April. (Nicholas Blanford, Assad's speech may buy time, but not survival, The Christian Science Monitor, June 20, 2011) The activist has a privileged relationship with Al Jazeera, according to NPR: When the Arabic channel Al-Jazeera broadcasts the latest news, the images come from Nakhle's network. (Deborah Amos, Syrian Activist In Hiding Presses Mission From Abroad, April 22, 2011.) It should be noted that Al Jazeera played a key role in promoting the regime change in Libya. CyberDissidents.org, a website presented by the Bush Center as a Voice of Freedom Online, offers a brief portrait of Nakhle, which is not unlike the other portraits found in the mainstream press, which describe him solely as a cyber-dissident, as if he never had any other occupation: "Rami Nakhle is a 27 year cyber-dissident. His use of social media to spread information about the Syrian Revolution caught the attention of Syrian authorities, causing him to flee to Lebanon in January 2011. For the past three years, he has been working under the pseudonym Malath Aumran. Although the Syrian secret police have discovered his real identity, he continues to use this pseudonym to retain recognition from his online followers. Despite these threats from the Syrian government, Nakhle continues to work in hiding, continuing his campaign for freedom through Facebook, Twitter, and full-access interviews with prominent news sources like BBC and The New York Times. (CyberDissident Database) Portrait of Rami Nakhle on CyberDissident.org The U.S. government and NGOs doing CIA work, such as Freedom House, are major sponsors of cyber-dissidence: "Political dissidents from China, Iran, Russia, Egypt, Syria, Venezuela and Cuba will travel to Dallas to join with Fellows of the George W. Bush Institute, experts from Freedom House, Harvards Berkman Center for Internet and Society, the U.S. Government and other leaders in the field to discuss the successes and challenges of Internet-based political dissident movements around the world. The George W. Bush Institute today [March 30, 2010] announced it will co-host a conference on cyber dissidents with the human rights organization Freedom House on April 19, 2010. (George W. Bush Institute and Freedom House to Convene Freedom Activists, Human Rights and Internet Experts to Assess Global Cyber Dissident Movement," Business Wire, March 30, 2011) Rami Nakhle doesnt hide his interests in American organisations. On his Facebook page, he lists the following as interests: National Democratic Institute (NDI), chaired by Madeleine Albright, Human Rights Watch and the U.S. Embassy Damascus. Nakhles interest in these organisations clearly shows which side hes on, just like SCN member Radwan Ziadeh, former fellow of the National Endowment for Democracy, another organization well-known for its links with the CIA. In an interview with the Guardian, the cyberactivist claims to be harassed by the Syrian secret police, on his Facebook wall. It might be true, but it would be a rather unusual tactic for a secret police, which usually, as its name says, acts secretly. Such harassment is more likely to be black propaganda -- people opposed to the regime trying to make the Syrian authorities look bad. A kind of "cyber false flag" on Facebook, for everyone to see. The "Syrian uprising" seems to be a copy and paste of the "protest movement" in Libya, which was conducive to a NATO invasion and regime change. The mainstream press has once again one principal source of information the opposition groups. The media neglects military casualties and fails to report that armed gunmen, 17 000 according to a report from the International Institute for Strategic Studies, are among the protesters. A non-elected body, the SNC, ironically is upheld as a democratic movement and is offered "credibility" as well as extensive mainstream media coverage. see link http://www.iiss.org/whats-new/iiss-voices/?blogpost=313 Global Research Articles by Julie Lévesque ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ==================================================== related link http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27839 Related Edited November 29, 2011 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted November 29, 2011 Author Share Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) Steven, Why do you read and post such garbage. It's not an historical review or analysis in any sense of the word. Here's a guy who says that imperialists western nations intentionally sparked the "CIA's Arab Spring" in Tunisia - not with the self immolation of Mohamid Bouazzi, as we know it began, but with anonymous snipers. And they aren't anonymous, they are clearly well paid and highly trained national army snipers - in the case of Libya, some of them women. The women snipers of Sirte made many martyrs, some were captured alive. This guy tries to give his article some legitimacy with footnotes, but he acknowledges - "None of these reports have been independently investigatedor corroborated. It is therefore impossible to draw any hard conclusions fromthese stories." And his failed marxist ideology is apparent and his loyalities are to tyrants - "When we are talking about the" left" here, we arereferring to genuine left wing parties, that is to say, parties who supportedthe Great People's Socialist Libyan Arab Jamahirya in their long and brave fight against Western imperialism, not the infantile petty bourgeois dupes who supported NATO's Benghazi terrorists. The blatant idiocy of such a stanceshould be crystal clear to anyone who understands global politics and class struggle." Well we do recognize the blatant idiocy of such thinking - and now the NATO Benghazi terrorists are in control. Then he moves on to Syria, where he says most of the people "support the government," which is blatantly untrue, and the government snipers have been picking off an average of a dozen people a day. The only thing he says that is remotely reliable is that Al Jezeera is owned and controlled by Qatar, but he doesn't mention they have refused to promote the revolution in Bahrain because they're pals with the dictator there. They're selective about which dictators they like and don't like. While I don't know about his other examples - his references to Tunisia, Libya and Syria are just the opposite of the truth, so I assume that his other examples are just as wrong. A really good essay on the use of snipers in the Regional Arab Revolutions has yet to be written. The guy claims to be Irish, and even gives the example of Bloody Sunday, but he's not Irish, he's an Idiot. And by the way, two women with duel Irish-Libyan citizenship have been appointed to the new Revolutionary Cabinet - as Ministers of Health and Education. Libya's PM chooses secularist candidates for cabinet posts - The Irish Times - Wed, Nov 23, 2011 And all these so-called "Leftists" who claim that al Qaeda and radical islamics have taken over Libya, say that the dictators were good for fighting these terrorists, don't realize that you can't put freedom back in the gene jar. BK Revolutionary Program VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVooooVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV* reality or PSY-OP ?? link http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27839 ========================VVVVVVVV================================ Bill, Glen Greenwald is a very resonable man.....LINK http://www.salon.com/2011/11/26/wes_clark_and_the_neocon_dream/singleton/ ---------------------------------oooooooo-------------- also see link http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2006/09/10/7385/phase-ii-report-conclusion/ Report: Saddam and Al Qaeda Enemies, Not Collaborators Edited November 29, 2011 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Very interesting, Stephen. It takes me back to the days of the FSLN in the late 70s and through the eighties. Always with the FMNL in El Salvador in mind. And inevitably there the running demos where the protesters ran in order to be less of targets, and then ArchBishop Romero of course. I wonder if this person has looked into this as a recurring theme with a long history and not just current events? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Steven, Why do you read and post such garbage. It's not an historical review or analysis in any sense of the word. Here's a guy who says that imperialists western nations intentionally sparked the "CIA's Arab Spring" in Tunisia - not with the self immolation of Mohamid Bouazzi, as we know it began, but with anonymous snipers.... Bill, You post at least several times in several threads, as if you have a vested stake in this controversy which you seem not to accept as even potentially controversial. "We" do not KNOW it began with the self immolation of Bouazizi. How would it harm you to embrace a healthy skepticism in this controversy, how does it help you to be so insistent about the importance of Bouazizi in the origins of the overthrow of the Tunisian government? Why can Bouazizi not be only a catalyst fanning the flames of a fire ingited earlier by unknown actors? Is it not possible that Bouazizi was as described in the BBC piece I've quoted from? http://www.guardian....litical-freedomTunisia, our supposedly stable 'friend' The west's search for Arab allies should not be at the cost of support for political freedom within those countries Rachel Linn - guardian.co.uk, Thursday 11 November 2010 ....The common view from outside is that Tunisia is stable. Because Ben Ali's government has provided economic growth and avoided the violence of neighbouring Algeria, most Tunisians supposedly have acquiesced to the exchange of political freedom for economic and personal security. This view also forms the basis of a rather meagre argument from Tunisia's allies as to why they are not more critical of the regime. Essentially, Tunisia is not creating any headaches for the west, and – in the post-9/11 international order – can be relied upon as a western-friendly Arab regime that will co-operate on security. But that does not mean this surface-level "stability" runs very deep. Most Tunisians I spoke to expressed real apprehension about the future. Though Tunisia's GDP grew steadily between the late 1980s and the mid-2000s, growth has slowed in recent years and unemployment has risen sharply. Economists suggest the actual (unpublished) rate of unemployment is around 25%, and possibly as high as 40% in the critical 18-25 age group. With ever-fewer outlets for discontented individuals to express their views, many fear the outcome could be a "national drama", in which the west would be seen as complicit for not pressuring the regime to limit itself.... http://www.bbc.co.uk...e-east-1380049316 June 2011 Last updated at 20:56 ET Doubt over Tunisian 'martyr' who triggered revolution Wyre Davies By Wyre Davies BBC News, Tunis ...It seems that for some Tunisians, the 26-year-old martyr is no longer a political hero but a media creation, manufactured for the convenience of those - outsiders - who wax lyrical about the birth of the Arab Spring.... Tom, that the CIA is behind the Arab Spring is the leftest "media creation," and I am open to persuasion that anything or anybody other than Bouazizi started it, but having investigated I can't find any other alternative. I am also open to healthy skepticism and debate, but not with those who say the dictators were benevolent leaders who fought terrorism. As you say, I have a personal stake in these events and have been following the situation in Libya for over a decade now, but as with the USA and the CIA - and France and Italy, I was with Gadhafi until he started killing his people. I was working with Dr. Ben Barber, a member of the board of directors of the Gadhafi Charities Foundation and personal mentor to Saif - Dr. Saif of the London School of Economics, who wrote in his thesis that it is the right of the people to revolt - and the Gadhafis agreed to what we wanted, it was/is the US Navy and US government who is against us. And the US government and the CIA via Ed Wilson were behind Gadhafi, so those who came into the game after NATO started bombing Gadhafi's troops just want to yell "imperialist crusader agreessor," when in fact it isn't just USA, but NATO is France, Italy, UN and Arab League, who all can't be wrong. As for Mohamid Bouazizi, when the revolution in Tunisia finally made it into the mainstream news, and began to spread to other Arab countries - notably Egypt, it was apparent that Libya, boxed in by Tunisia and Egypt, could not be kept immune from the revolt, so I began my blog with the idea of just keeping track of the situation, and not endorsing either side - but it quickly became apparent that the dictators were wrong and the revolutionaries were right. In trying to determine the origins of the revolt I went back and looked at all of the media reports - and it was quite apparent that the USA, UK and especially France were not only in bed with Gadhafi and Mubarak, but also Ali, who as your report accurately reflects - was popular with a large segment of the population as was Mubarak and Gadhafi and the other dictators in Syria, Bahrain and Yemen, and encouraged economic growth, but not enough. In Mid-December 2010 the women foreign minister of France and her family arrived in Tunisia for the holiday season as guests of Ali, and flying around in a private plain of an industrialist with economic interests in the country, and they were there when the revolt began - and she - the foreign minister of France, offered Ali extra teargas and anti-riot and military weapons that he could us on his own people. The origins of the revolt were basically economic - and the fact that Ali's security state - a women cop - slapped Bouazizi around - which motivated his suicidal action. Your article is correct - the common view was that Tunisia was stable and secure - and that view was certainly held in the CIA and USA, France, et al. - a view that was apparently wrong. Nobody saw this revolution coming, and it is now in its first full year and still going strong - four dictators down and more to go - and it is an event a Deep Political Event as big as the Cold War, Kennedy assassination or Vietnam, and deserves full attention and review. I was one of the few people who even bothered to read the article Steve posted because I read as much as possible about these events, especially if they reflect on Libya, and it is absurd to suggest that the CIA or western powers incited these revolutions by utilizing secret unknown snipers, when in fact ALL of the snipers in this revolution so far have been identified and are State Security Snipers, not revolutionaries, as most of the dissidents are unarmed. The Guardian article by Rachel Linn is interesting in that her speculation is right on - and a month before it begins. Here is the first article I can find on the origins of the revolution in Tunisia - which is generally acknowledged by everyone except ideological nitwits - as the spark that set off a Regional Revolution that even spread to the USA as the Occupy Wall Street movement - Witnessesreport rioting in Tunisian town http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE6BI06U20101219 Sun Dec 19, 2010 2:59pm GMT TUNIS (Reuters) - Police in a provincial city in Tunisia used tear gas late onSaturday to disperse hundreds of youths who smashed shop windows and damagedcars, witnesses told Reuters. There was no immediate comment from officials on thedisturbances. Riots are extremely rare for Tunisia, a north African countryof about 10 million people which is one of the most prosperous and stable inthe region. Witnesses said several hundred youths gathered in the city ofSidi Bouzid, about 200 km (125miles) south-west of the capital Tunis, late on Saturday. They were angered by an incident where a young man, MohamedBouazizi, had set fire to himself in protest after police confiscated the fruitand vegetables he was selling from a street stall, the witnesses said. "The violent clashes ended with the arrest of scores ofpeople," a witness, who requested anonymity, told Reuters. "(Therewas) breaking of shop windows and smashing of cars, while police fired teargas." Another witness, a relative of the man who set fire tohimself, said outbreaks of rioting had continued into Sunday. "People are angry at the case of Mohamed and thedeterioration of unemployment in the region," said Mahdi Said Horchani."Regional authorities have promised to intervene." He said Bouazizi was in a critical condition and had beentransferred to a hospital in Tunis. Footage posted on the Facebook social network site showedseveral hundred protesters outside the regional government headquarters, withlines of police blocking them from getting closer to the building. It did notshow any violence. Witnesses said hundreds of extra security forces had beenbrought into Sidi Bouzid on Sunday and had established a heavy presence on thestreets. Calls placed by Reuters seeking comment from Tunisianofficials went (unanswered). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Suggested further reading "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man," by John Perkins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted November 29, 2011 Author Share Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) Steven, Why do you read and post such garbage. It's not an historical review or analysis in any sense of the word. Here's a guy who says that imperialists western nations intentionally sparked the "CIA's Arab Spring" in Tunisia - not with the self immolation of Mohamid Bouazzi, as we know it began, but with anonymous snipers.... Bill, You post at least several times in several threads, as if you have a vested stake in this controversy which you seem not to accept as even potentially controversial. "We" do not KNOW it began with the self immolation of Bouazizi. How would it harm you to embrace a healthy skepticism in this controversy, how does it help you to be so insistent about the importance of Bouazizi in the origins of the overthrow of the Tunisian government? Why can Bouazizi not be only a catalyst fanning the flames of a fire ingited earlier by unknown actors? Is it not possible that Bouazizi was as described in the BBC piece I've quoted from? http://www.guardian....litical-freedomTunisia, our supposedly stable 'friend' The west's search for Arab allies should not be at the cost of support for political freedom within those countries Rachel Linn - guardian.co.uk, Thursday 11 November 2010 ....The common view from outside is that Tunisia is stable. Because Ben Ali's government has provided economic growth and avoided the violence of neighbouring Algeria, most Tunisians supposedly have acquiesced to the exchange of political freedom for economic and personal security. This view also forms the basis of a rather meagre argument from Tunisia's allies as to why they are not more critical of the regime. Essentially, Tunisia is not creating any headaches for the west, and – in the post-9/11 international order – can be relied upon as a western-friendly Arab regime that will co-operate on security. But that does not mean this surface-level "stability" runs very deep. Most Tunisians I spoke to expressed real apprehension about the future. Though Tunisia's GDP grew steadily between the late 1980s and the mid-2000s, growth has slowed in recent years and unemployment has risen sharply. Economists suggest the actual (unpublished) rate of unemployment is around 25%, and possibly as high as 40% in the critical 18-25 age group. With ever-fewer outlets for discontented individuals to express their views, many fear the outcome could be a "national drama", in which the west would be seen as complicit for not pressuring the regime to limit itself.... http://www.bbc.co.uk...e-east-1380049316 June 2011 Last updated at 20:56 ET Doubt over Tunisian 'martyr' who triggered revolution Wyre Davies By Wyre Davies BBC News, Tunis ...It seems that for some Tunisians, the 26-year-old martyr is no longer a political hero but a media creation, manufactured for the convenience of those - outsiders - who wax lyrical about the birth of the Arab Spring.... Tom, that the CIA is behind the Arab Spring is the leftest "media creation," and I am open to persuasion that anything or anybody other than Bouazizi started it, but having investigated I can't find any other alternative. I am also open to healthy skepticism and debate, but not with those who say the dictators were benevolent leaders who fought terrorism. As you say, I have a personal stake in these events and have been following the situation in Libya for over a decade now, but as with the USA and the CIA - and France and Italy, I was with Gadhafi until he started killing his people. I was working with Dr. Ben Barber, a member of the board of directors of the Gadhafi Charities Foundation and personal mentor to Saif - Dr. Saif of the London School of Economics, who wrote in his thesis that it is the right of the people to revolt - and the Gadhafis agreed to what we wanted, it was/is the US Navy and US government who is against us. And the US government and the CIA via Ed Wilson were behind Gadhafi, so those who came into the game after NATO started bombing Gadhafi's troops just want to yell "imperialist crusader agreessor," when in fact it isn't just USA, but NATO is France, Italy, UN and Arab League, who all can't be wrong. As for Mohamid Bouazizi, when the revolution in Tunisia finally made it into the mainstream news, and began to spread to other Arab countries - notably Egypt, it was apparent that Libya, boxed in by Tunisia and Egypt, could not be kept immune from the revolt, so I began my blog with the idea of just keeping track of the situation, and not endorsing either side - but it quickly became apparent that the dictators were wrong and the revolutionaries were right. In trying to determine the origins of the revolt I went back and looked at all of the media reports - and it was quite apparent that the USA, UK and especially France were not only in bed with Gadhafi and Mubarak, but also Ali, who as your report accurately reflects - was popular with a large segment of the population as was Mubarak and Gadhafi and the other dictators in Syria, Bahrain and Yemen, and encouraged economic growth, but not enough. In Mid-December 2010 the women foreign minister of France and her family arrived in Tunisia for the holiday season as guests of Ali, and flying around in a private plain of an industrialist with economic interests in the country, and they were there when the revolt began - and she - the foreign minister of France, offered Ali extra teargas and anti-riot and military weapons that he could us on his own people. The origins of the revolt were basically economic - and the fact that Ali's security state - a women cop - slapped Bouazizi around - which motivated his suicidal action. Your article is correct - the common view was that Tunisia was stable and secure - and that view was certainly held in the CIA and USA, France, et al. - a view that was apparently wrong. Nobody saw this revolution coming, and it is now in its first full year and still going strong - four dictators down and more to go - and it is an event a Deep Political Event as big as the Cold War, Kennedy assassination or Vietnam, and deserves full attention and review. I was one of the few people who even bothered to read the article Steve posted because I read as much as possible about these events, especially if they reflect on Libya, and it is absurd to suggest that the CIA or western powers incited these revolutions by utilizing secret unknown snipers, when in fact ALL of the snipers in this revolution so far have been identified and are State Security Snipers, not revolutionaries, as most of the dissidents are unarmed. The Guardian article by Rachel Linn is interesting in that her speculation is right on - and a month before it begins. Here is the first article I can find on the origins of the revolution in Tunisia - which is generally acknowledged by everyone except ideological nitwits - as the spark that set off a Regional Revolution that even spread to the USA as the Occupy Wall Street movement - Witnessesreport rioting in Tunisian town http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE6BI06U20101219 Sun Dec 19, 2010 2:59pm GMT TUNIS (Reuters) - Police in a provincial city in Tunisia used tear gas late onSaturday to disperse hundreds of youths who smashed shop windows and damagedcars, witnesses told Reuters. There was no immediate comment from officials on thedisturbances. Riots are extremely rare for Tunisia, a north African countryof about 10 million people which is one of the most prosperous and stable inthe region. Witnesses said several hundred youths gathered in the city ofSidi Bouzid, about 200 km (125miles) south-west of the capital Tunis, late on Saturday. They were angered by an incident where a young man, MohamedBouazizi, had set fire to himself in protest after police confiscated the fruitand vegetables he was selling from a street stall, the witnesses said. "The violent clashes ended with the arrest of scores ofpeople," a witness, who requested anonymity, told Reuters. "(Therewas) breaking of shop windows and smashing of cars, while police fired teargas." Another witness, a relative of the man who set fire tohimself, said outbreaks of rioting had continued into Sunday. "People are angry at the case of Mohamed and thedeterioration of unemployment in the region," said Mahdi Said Horchani."Regional authorities have promised to intervene." He said Bouazizi was in a critical condition and had beentransferred to a hospital in Tunis. Footage posted on the Facebook social network site showedseveral hundred protesters outside the regional government headquarters, withlines of police blocking them from getting closer to the building. It did notshow any violence. Witnesses said hundreds of extra security forces had beenbrought into Sidi Bouzid on Sunday and had established a heavy presence on thestreets. Calls placed by Reuters seeking comment from Tunisianofficials went (unanswered). VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV0000VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVooooVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV============== Golly, maybe Ben Barber not a 'good guy' ???? ====Golly seems to love the Palestinian people,oops guess not.========================================================= The cyber-security perception management machinery was also put into high gear in the August 1 edtion of The Washington Times. A story by Ben Barber hyped the threat posed by Palestinian computer users who have launched a so-called "cyber-Jihad" against Israeli government and corporate computers. The article states that the U.S. government-funded firms RAND and iDefense are urging the United States to adopt the same cyber defenses as those usedin Israel. And the article gives us the potential next phase of the U.S. government's perception management campaign: Palestinian sites will start distributing viruses aimed at the United States -- one Palestinian site is blamed for distributing the Love Bug and Melissa viruses. If one remembers, however, Love Bug originated in the Philippines while Melissa came from Trenton, New Jersey. They are a long way off from Nablus and Ramallah on the West Bank. Even in pseudo cyber-war, the truth is the greatest casualty! link http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=69&contentid=233&page=2 ===================================================== BK QUOTE Here is the first article I can find on the origins of the revolution in Tunisia..... Sun Dec 19, 2010 2:59pm GMT END BILL KELLY QUOTE +======================= Golly,maybe revolutions appear like magic,opps guess not.BTW Bill I posted before,NO SLAP. The false slap story (by a "FEMALE") was a tactic PSY-op to incite the male muslim mind. She took his fruit/vegtable scale to police station and police didnt give it back. He was now out of work..then......you know the rest of the story.= August 2, 2010 12:46 PM ET State Department unhappy. CIA connected CPJ decries Tunisia media freedom. link http://cpj.org/blog/2010/08/circle-of-media-repression-widens-over-tunisias-hi.php +++++++++++++++ Australian State Department +++++++ Travel Advice for Tunisia - Australian Department of Foreign Affairs ... Aug 11, 2010 We advise you to exercise a high degree of caution in Tunisia because of the unsettled security situation, the risk of civil unrest and the threat of kidnapping and terrorist attack. We advise you to reconsider your need to travel to the areas ... +++++++++++++++++++++++++oooo++++++++++++++++++++++ Tuesday, August 17, 2010 Restrictions on trade with Libya spark riots in Tunisia link http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/af_tunisia0788_08_17.asp +++++++++++++++++++++++++++oooo+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Aug 2/2010 unemployment rates are estimated to be at least 30% overall, and more than 40% for youth between ages 18 and 25 Aug-2-2010 Tunisia – The Imprisonment of Fahem Boukadous (Part One of a series) August 2, 2010 tags: Adnan Hajji, Afef Benaceur, Bourguiba, Djemaa Hajji, El Hiwar Eltounsi, Fahem Boukadous, Gafsa, Metlaoui, Redeyef, Reporters Without Borders, Tunisia, UGTT, Union Generale Tunisienne de Travail, Zine Ben Ali (note: it has come to my attention that this little harmless blog is currently censored by the Tunisian government, meaning that the content is blocked by the authorities there. I am honored to learn this. Although difficult to substantiate, there is a good chance that it is a credible claim. As a result, I intend to write many more pieces on the situation in Tunisia – a country whose relative economic success in Africa is matched only by the seething repression of all forms of dissent by its unpopular government – a democracy in name, but dictatorship in fact – run by Zine Ben Ali, who was trained in a US police academy several decades ago. Ben Ali became Habib Bourguiba’s Minister of Interior and then, in what amounted to a `medical coup’ of sorts, overthrew Bourguiba, had him declared incompetent to rule, and took over. That was nearly a quarter century ago. – cheers, RJP) ___________________________________ other entries on Tunisia and on the 2008 events in Redeyef: - Part Two – Tunisia – The Imprisonment of Fahem Boukadous (Part Two of a series) - Part Three – Tunisia – The Imprisonment of Fahem Boukadous (Part Three of a series) - Part Four – Tunisia – The Imprisonment of Fahem Boukadous (Part Four of a series) - Redeyef: The Struggle For Dignity - Land Grab, Repression in Tunisia’s Phosphate Belt - Farhat Hached and the Struggle for Tunisian Independence - Amnesty International’s Assessment of the 2008 Social Protest Movement in the Gafsa Region of Tunisia - Tunisia: Videos on Political Repression (added Nov. 15, 2010) ___________________________________ “The only way that the [Tunisian] state deals with social problems is with police repression” ——————-Moktar Trifi, President of the Tunisian League of Human Rights———————— Who Is Fahem Boukadous? To most Americans with the exception of those few, for whatever Fahrem Boukadous - Tunisian political prisoner risks death from health treatment neglect from Tunisian authorities reason, who have an attachment to the North African country of Tunisia, the name Fahem Boukadous, so foreign to American ears, means nothing. It means a good deal more to `Reporters Without Borders‘ and to the US State Department that actually issued a statement (half way down the page) on his behalf, to the US intelligence agencies and military that have carefully followed the Spring, 2008 uprising in the Tunisian region of Gafsa – deemed the most extensive and militant social protest in that country’s history in the past quarter century. During the Gafsa protests (more, much more on this in later posts) Fahem Boukadous was there in the mining town of Redeyef at the center of the center of the social storm, reporting for the satelitte tv network El Hiwar Eltounsi on the events as they unfolded. Along with several other journalists, among them a young female journalist Zakregh Dhifaoui, Boukadous was indicted on conspiracy charges of “forming a criminal association liable to attack persons and their property” and “disseminating information liable to disturb the public order”. Many of the trials themselves seemed fixed. For example, residing judges refused to order medical examinations for defendants who claimed they had suffered torture at the hands of the local police. In Boukadous’ case, the heart of the matter is that he was merely doing his job – reporting on the events unfolding in Redeyef without government filters. This, in the eyes of the Ben Ali regime, with its long history of repression against dissent, was enough to send Boukadous to prison. When the arrest warrants were issued, Boukadous went underground, but was captured at a Tunisian hospital while receiving medical treatment for the chronic asthma from which he suffers. A few weeks ago, now two years after the fact, Boukadous was sentenced by a court in Gafsa to four years in prison. He now languishes in prison in Gafsa where his health is seriously deteriorating; Gafsa is located close to the edge of the Sahara some 250 miles southwest of Tunis. Summers there are difficult with temperatures frequently reaching about 120 degrees fahrenheit (50+ centigrade). About ten days ago (July 23, 2010) Boukadous apparently suffered a major asthma attack which was ignored by the Gafsa prison authorities, who refused to administer the oxygen Boukadous needed. Indeed he was actually denied medical attention at the time and was simply left in his cell to rot. According to a report that appeared on the `Reporters Without Borders’ website (published on July 28, 2010 – ie – just five days ago), it is only after his fellow inmates beat on the doors of their cells and shouted for help that the prison guards finally intervened. A doctor from the Gafsa Hospital arrives some forty minutes later. Boukadous had already slipped into critical condition. It was only through his timely intervention that Boukadous’ life was saved. Boukadous’ wife, Afef Benaceur, has been active on her husband’s behalf, drawing attention to his situation. Without outside pressure, it is unlikely that Fahem Boukadous will live to see the end of his sentence. He should be immediately released. The charges were trumped up in the first place. 2. Tunisia: A country divided…no economic miracle The events leading to the arrest, conviction and imprisonment of Tunisian journalist Fahem Boukarous began more than two and a half years ago. In a sense, his imprisonment is a kind of `collateral damage’ to an uprising against poverty, injustice, unemployment and degradation that exploded in the phosphate mining district centered around the city of Gafsa in Tunisia’s far west near the Algerian border. Boukarous was little more than a `messenger’ – relaying with journalist accuracy the scope of the social protest movement to his country and the broader world through Hiwar Eltounsi – the tv satellite network station he worked for. But his reporting, and those of other honest journalists who were able to penetrate the district blocked off for months by Tunisian security forces, stripped the veil off the myth of the happy little North African country in which economic progress, fueled by European tourism, was leading to a generalized prosperity. Instead what came through to anyone serious enough to watch and listen, is a country divided, divided between its super rich – a bevvy of families many of the related to the country’s president Zine Ben Ali on the one hand and the multitude of the Tunisian people living growing poverty. The division between the more prosperous northern section of the country around Tunis and the seriously economically and socially deprived south also reared its head. Any student of modern Tunisian history knows that again and again the calls for social justice, to make the Tunisian government live up to its promise of greater democracy and prosperity almost always have originated in the south, be it from the same Gafsa phosphate miners who took the last Tunisian president, Habib Bourguiba or the poor people from the coastal region of Gabes near the Libyan border who led the `food riots’ – demonstrations against the lifting of subsidies on bread in the early 1980s as part of the Tunisian response to IMF and World Bank structural adjustment programs. 3. The Good Women of Redeyef… On or about April 10, 2008, 30 women from the Tunisian mining town of Redeyef took to the streets, calling for the release of their husbands, fathers and sons, held in prison in the regional center, Gafsa. Some of them were widows whose husbands had died in the mines the families of which had received no benefits. Some were the mothers of the region’s unemployed youth, that some sources say had reached the 40% level. The men they were supporting had been jailed protesting the lack of job opportunities and what appeared to be the manipulation of job hiring practices at a local phosphate mine. Specifically, a number of the activists had just returned from Tunis where they had participated in a solidarity event organized by one of the many `Redeyef Support Committees’ which had sprung up all over the country. On April 4, 2008, a `day of solidarity’ was held in Tunis with some Redeyef trade unionists and activists in attendance. Returning home to Redeyef they were arrested along with dozens of others, among them Adnan Hajji, mentioned above, secretary of the local branch of the teachers’ union. In response and solidarity, the Gafsa area teachers’ union suspended classes and called a general strike that lasted three days. Belying the image of `passive’, `oppressed’ Muslim women so often portrayed in the European and US media, and fueled on by the righteous rage that comes from exploitation and injustice, the women marched to the jail to demand the release of their husbands. As they marched to the center of the town, hundreds of others joined them. The next day, as proof that protest actions can produce results, the Gafsa regional authorities released imprisoned activists to their waiting women-folk. Released prisoners and their wives then returned to Redeyef, their home town. Some 20,000 residents of this city of 37,000 turned out to greet them, more than half of Redeyef’s population. And there amidst the crowds, Adnan Hajji, a local teacher spoke to the crowds. He would emerge, at that moment, as one of the key leaders of the social protest movement which was then at its height. Amidst miners union banners and people carrying signs with slogans like “the people’s wealth goes to build palaces, while we live in tents’, `we are going on strike for the right to work’, Hajji addressed the crowd. His words resonated with the multitudes listening. `We, here, are the people; we will fight until either we win or die’. `What we are fighting for are basic rights for ourselves, our families, our youth.’ `What we have here,’ he went on, is the culmination of many years of poverty, destitution and injustice’. `The company is stealing the wealth that we have created through our labor and put it in the hands of a few wealthy individuals at the expense of the people.’ A spontaneous and popular movement which would keep struggling despite repression and censorship had taken shape. 4. Six months of sustained protests in Gafsa region… The event which was to trigger six months of militant social protest against the Tunisian government of Zine Ben Ali and the state run phosphate company that runs all of the mines, the Compagnie Phosphate de Gafsa – CPG (The Gafsa Phosphate Company), seemed innocuous enough. On January 5, 2008, the CPG published a list, the results of a public examination for the recruitment of 80 new employees at its phosphate mines. But the list was considered fraudulent, ‘cooked’ in such a way that the position went to people `with connections’ – family connections that is – with members of the shrinking miner’s union, a branch of the Union Generale Tunisienne de Travail (UGTT). The suspicion abounded that the union and the company had struck a deal, excluding all but a short list of applicants. In a region where youth unemployment is estimated by a number of sources to be as high as 40%, the results were seen not only as unfair, but more as intolerable. Almost immediately thereafter, the spark of rebellion exploded into something larger and broader than the issue of who did or didn’t pass CPG’s exam. It quickly expanded into a regional social movement for jobs, social programs and against the neglect and injustice which has characterized the Ben Ali’s approach to the region for decades. At the heart of this rebellion were the region’s long neglected youth, women, many local educators and finally, forced by the flow of events, the local union itself. During the early months of 2008, demonstrations for jobs took place at least once a week, with participants filling the streets of Redeyef in peaceful, organized and disciplined protest to the economic and social conditions of the region. As the movement built over January and February, support committees sprung up in the major coastal cities of Tunis, Sousse, Sfax as well as in France which hosts a large Tunisian community as well. The goal of this protest movement was to enter into direct negotiations with the Ben Ali government to procure a commitment from the central government for jobs, better social programs. Some results followed by savage repression Interestingly enough, these first demonstrations did produce some results. In April, both he regional Gafsa area authorities and the central government in Tunis committed themselves, or so it seemed, to address some of the grievances. Promises were made. Unfortunately, in retrospect, the Tunisian government had something else in mind and that their willingness to listen and negotiate over the grievances was simply a tactical maneuver to buy time in order to organize a crippling blow to the movement, which in essence, was nothing more than a reform movement which had been peaceful and despite everything, at least until this point, respectful of the central government. From all descriptions of the events,the crackdown was far worse than the people of Redeyef anticipated. Just when it appeared that some agreement had been reached, and the protests started to ebb, the government opened up a savage wave of repression whose goal was to `decapitate’ (lovely word) the movement’s leadership and pulverize the movement. It was meant to be an example – as such crackdowns almost always are – to others in the country who might have economic and social grievances – as to the price that people would have to pay from calling openly for justice. The crackdown was unleashed. The government accused the movement’s leadership of trying to organize a coup. . It included a massive wave of arrests of several hundred, including children as young as five and six years of age, widespread torture and other forms of repression. In June, the repression reached its peak as the Tunisian police open fired on a crowd in Redeyef, one that was not even demonstrating, but simply coming and going in the town’s market place. Two people died; one of them was a young man originally from Redeyef, who had found employment on the island of Djerba. He had come back home to give his first paycheck to his ailing family, was not a part of any political action or group, just happened to be in the wrong place – central Redeyef – when the police open fired and was killed. Another was mortally wounded and died later in a hospital in Sfax, on the coast. At this point, with people in Redeyef being machine gunned from armored personnel carriers and tanks by their own government, a massive movement to simply empty out the city, and migrate across the border to nearby Algeria began. `If the government wants to occupy Redeyef,’ they said, `they can have it.’ It turns out that Ben Ali was more even more threatened by a mass exodus of Tunisians from Redeyef to the Algerian border than he was even of the social movement itself. The exodus undercut his claims that Tunisia is `an economic miracle’…and that the conditions of life are so bad in this part of the country that the whole social fabric of life had collapsed. Not good for tourism or investment alas. Fearing the negative publicity that such a migration would entail if it reached the international media, the Ben Ali government sent troops to the border, not to keep people from getting in, but to stop the residents of the Gafsa region, their movement and their hopes crushed by their own countrymen from leaving! Fleeing Redeyefites were threatened with being charged with high treason, for trying to emigrate. It took the intervention of some of the protest leaders themselves – some of whom would later be sentenced to long prison terms for their role in the protests – to convince many of those fleeing, to stay…and live to fight another day. 5. Root causes of the Protests…History of The Gafsa Phosphate Company (Compagnie Phosphate de Gafsa) The phosphate mines of the Gafsa region of Tunisia were first discovered in1897 by one Philippe Thomas, a veterinarian, local prison warden and amateur geologist. A number of towns, which previously did not exist, were created to service the mine, among them Redeyef, Oum Laarayes, Metlaoui, and El Mdhilla. From the outset of the mining era at the turn of the 20th century until the present the Gafsa mining belt has suffered from the kinds of abuses not uncommon to mining towns the world over: brutal land grab from the indigenous population; intensive exploitation of natural resources; dangerous working conditions and along with it high accident and mortality rates; economic activities that produced nothing short of huge amounts of pollutant wastes; environmental degradation. A system that breeds despair and revolt… The workforce itself is based largely on patronage, clan and family ties that have excluded many. The work includes low wages, very little job security and the management positions are often manned by foreigners, especially from France. It is a system set up to breed despair and revolt. It should not be surprising that, time and again (1930s, 1970s, 2008), it is from the workers in these Gafsa region mines – along with the communities in which they live – that some of the most militant and best organized movements of protest and social change have erupted and spread throughout the country. In the 1930s it was both the economic practices of French colonialism that were opposed. The role of the Gafsa miners, and more generally, the Tunisian working class, in the struggle against French colonialism has hardly been appreciated. Then in the 1970s, the miners and their union rose up against Bourguiba’s drift towards authoritarianism. It was their efforts, in tandem with the democratic elements in the cities, that forced Bourguiba – kicking and screaming one might add – to open to Tunisia to more of a multi-party democracy with greater press freedoms. And now, as recently as 2008, the conditions of life in the Gafsa region – inexcusably neglected by Ben Ali and his government – have led to the current uprising – and that does appear to be the correct word that describes these events, which like previous episodes includes both economic (jobs, regional development) and political (end to the pervasive repression, more freedom of expression and real democracy – not the charade that currently exists). And once again, in their own way, the good women of Redeyef are fighting for more than their own self interest, but for what one might call `the humanization’ of the whole country. Not a pretty picture and one that compares with the mines here in Colorado at the turn of the 20th century. Virtually all of these practices, which came into force during the colonial period, have continued after Tunisian independence in March 1956. Indeed it is rather impressive the degree to which economic structures and practices first developed and instituted in the French colonial period have held fast in the post-independence period. Other than the mines, the region offers little employment opportunities. Indeed, phosphate mining is the only show in town. On the edge of the Sahara (not quite full desert but close), the possibilities for agriculture are slim and while the Tunisian coast has a large and developed tourism infrastructure that supports some 7 million foreign visitors a year, mostly from Europe, the interior areas around Gafsa are rather barren and dry. For the people living there, the mines are the only source of sustenance, the only possibility of employment in spite of the poor working conditions and low wages. ___________________________________________________________ Indeed it is rather impressive the degree to which economic structures and practices first developed and instituted in the French colonial period have held fast in the post-independence period. ___________________________________________________________ After independence, the CPG – (Gafsa Phosphate Company) – became a state owned industry run by the government in Tunis. In 1996 it was merged with Tunisian Chemical Group. Looking at the Tunsian phosphate industry on paper, it looks to be a success story, hiding its human consequences behind typically deceptive economic indicators. Tunisia is one of the world’s leading producers of phosphates, mineral fertilizers and refined phosphate products.. Compagnie des Phosphates de Gafsa (CPG) has been active in mining for more than a century. Mineral production itself under Tunisan auspices is now more than half a century old. CPG operates seven open cast quarries and one underground mine. The phosphatic field holds an important position within the Tunisian economy both in labour level and in trade balance worldwide. The Tunisian phosphate industry is fifth amongst the international operators in the field. Natural phosphate and its by-products (Phosacid, DAP, TSP, DCP…) are exported to 50 countries in 5 continents. In 2002, phosphates were Tunisia’s third largest export commodity, greater than hydrocarbons which ranked fifth. Together, Tunisia’s phosphates, base metals and petroleum products provide most of the country’s foreign earnings with phosphates alone accounting for 13% of the total value of national exports. Overall, the mineral industries contribute around 4% of gnp Annual production of merchant phosphate in 2007 reached 8 millions, placing Tunisia the fifth in the world for phosphate production. Not only that, Tunisia has been more successful than many peripheral countries in the global economy in that it has successfully developed a more profitable refining component. After having been exporting all its phosphate rock production during the first fifty years of its activity, Tunisia entered successfully into phosphoric acid and mineral fertilizers production and developed this new activity so that Tunisia is now processing refining more than 80% of its phosphate production. GCT owns 4 industrial sites located in Sfax and M’dhilla (for TSP), Gabes (for Phosphoric Acid, DAP, DCP and AN) and Skhira (for Phosphoric Acid). A profitable, well run company, at least on paper, it has the potential for being an engine for Gafsa regional development. But just as many oil producing regions of oil producing countries don’t necessarily benefit materially from the wealth they extract, neither do the mining communities of the Gafsa region. Poverty, social problems with the predictable social unrest and rebellion all have a long history in the region. Those structural weaknesses were all exacerbated by, of all things, the modernization of the industry. But as it is a state owned and run company, it is even more inexcusable to so little of its profits gets recycled back to the Gafsa region. Although the modernization of the Gafsa mines began before CPG merged with Tunisian Chemical group in 1996, since then, the mines have been significantly modernized. Deep shaft underground mining has been largely replaced by mechanized open pit mining involving heavy machinery Fatalities have been reduced But as a result of this modernization, as elsewhere where similar changes have been institutionalized, 75% of the mining work force has been laid off, with no opportunities for alternative employment in the region. Mines that used to employ up to 20,000 workers now offer employment to around 5000; those jobs that do remain are `the envy of the region’ but they are precious few and far between and depending on the source, the unemployment rates are estimated to be at least 30% overall, and more than 40% for youth between ages 18 and 25. Again, as elsewhere, modernization has included a high degree of sub-contracting. The mines employ poorly paid sub-contractors to do a fair amount of the work with low salaries and no job security. Again, the consequence of modernization of the Gafsa mining region is not atypical. Mechanization has led to increased productivity and profits on the one hand, but a dramatically shrinking mining workforce on the other. The company’s profits soar…as does unemployment in the mines. Another Factor: Hiring Outside of the Redeyef Region Another factor complicating the situation is that the state run mining company these past years has gone out of its way to hire men (it is almost exclusively men) from outside of the Redeyef region to work in the mine. Employees are recruited from as far away as Sfax, Sousse and Tunis. This only aggravates the local unemployment situation. It is meant, in large measure, to dilute the organizing skills and militant traditions of the families that have worked in the mines for generations. It also helped fuel a great deal of animosity among locals who have the impression – with some justification – of being systemiatically excluded from finding jobs in the mines. Gafsa’s Story… Not Unique Gafsa’s story has been repeated worldwide, including here in the USA, to some extent. For example, the 1985-2005 modernization of the Appalachia coal industry in the USA, accomplished through the proliferation of strip mining (surface and mountain top removal mining) increased mining production by 22% while the number of jobs decreased by 55%. More profits, smaller work force, a ton of environmental problems that are, once again, poorly regulated. (Nation Magazine – April 15, 2010 – Cracking Big Coal -) Likewise, modernization of the Gafsa phosphate region has brought profit to the owners, but poverty and despair to the region. Global tale – this is the Tunisian version. Fahem Boukadous’ `crime’ was simply to have reported honestly on this social crisis, but by so doing he burst the myth that Zini Ben Ali’s government has been spreading that Tunisia is an island of prosperity and social calm, `an economic miracle’. But,there is no economic miracle but more of a Potemkin village economy based on tourism; and if there is `social calm’ – it is the calm of repression a held together by one of the most repressive governments anywhere, and I might add, once again long supported financially and politically by the United States government. But more on how all that works, later. Edited November 29, 2011 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 (edited) For a sniper's view of Misrahta see: Revolutionary Program BK: I would venture that half of the casualties of the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Syira so far have been caused by regime loyalist snipers, and this fact has not been really looked into or given the analysis it deserves. I repost this totally ridiculous "historical review and analysis" with my commentary, because I think the topic of snipers is important and should be focused on in more depth and detail, but not in the same frame as this Russian Pravda Party Line by an idiot Irishman. Unknown Snipers and Western backed "Regime Change" A Historical Review and Analysis by Gearóid Ó Colmáin http://www.globalres...xt=va&aid=27904 Unknown snipers played a pivotal role throughout the so-called "Arab Spring Revolutions" yet, in spite of reports of their presence in the mainstream media, surprisingly little attention has been paid to to their purpose androle. BK: There were daily reports of the snipers in every media, and a number of reporters were shot by snipers, including Franklin Lamb, a Gadhafi Loyalist who was shot in the leg outside his hotel by a Gadhafi sniper perched in theTripoli Marriott hotel, which up to then had received very little damage. Afterwards, it was probably pummeled by return rebel fire. Snipers took a very heavy toll on the rebel forces and probably account for half of the casualties in the Battles of Misratha and Sirte. Some of the women snipers in Sirte were later captured alive, and all were loyalists, and their purpose and role was to kill all the rebel rats at Gadhafi's orders. The Russian investigative journalist Nikolay Starikov has written a book which discusses the role of unknown snipers in the destabilization of countries targeted for regime change by the United States and its allies. BK Notes: Starikov Nikolai Viktorovich (August 23 1970, Leningrad) — is a Russian writer and opinion journalist who describes his works as"historically political detective", a thrilling mix of geopolitics,economics, history of Russiaand different countries and bases his historical books on memoirs ofparticipants and eyewitnesses of a described event. Starikov is the organizerof the "Goebbels' Award", which is awarded to "people who lieabout, slander and vilify Russia". His Blog - http://nstarikov.ru/en/ There's also a list of books by SNVat Wiki but no book on snipers, as referred to by the author.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Starikov Romania 1989. In Susanne Brandstätter's documentary 'Checkmate: Strategy of a Revolution'aired on Arte television station some years ago, Western intelligence officials revealed how death squads were used to destabilize Romania and turn its people against the head of state Nicolai Ceaucescu. Brandstätter's film is a must see for anyone interested in how Western intelligence agencies, human rights groups and the corporate press collude in the systematic destruction of countries whose leadership conflicts with the interests of big capital and empire. BK: I hope her film is easier to find than SNV'sbook on snipers. If anyone can find a reference to Starikov's book on snipers please send it to me at: Bkjfk3@yahoo.com thanks. Former secret agent with the French secret service, the DGSE(LaDirection générale de la sécurité extérieure) Dominique Fonvielle, spoke candidlyabout the role of Western intelligence operatives in destabilizing the Romanian population. "How do you organize a revolution? I believe the first step is to locate oppositional forces in a given country. It is sufficient to have a highly developed intelligence service in order to determine which people are credible enough to have influence at their hands to destabilize the people to the disadvantage of the ruling regime"[2] BK:Yes this is all true, from the perspective of a foreign intelligence officer,but not that of the domestic revolutionary who wants to overthrow the existing regime. Fonvielle certainly wouldn't consider Mohamid Bouazizi, who sparked the revolution in Tunisia,as being "credible enough to have influence at their hands to destabilize the people," so his comment can't be attributed to the Arab revolution in Tunisiaor any where for that matter. This open and rare admission of Western sponsorship of terrorism was justified on the grounds of the "greater good" brought to Romaniaby free-market capitalism. It was necessary, according to the strategists of Romania's"revolution", for some people to die. BK: Yes, it is the admission of state sponsorship of terrorism, though I think he was speaking in generalities and not specifics, and didn't mention motive,or capitalism. Today, Romaniaremains one of the poorest countries in Europe. A reporton Euractiv reads: "Most Romanians associate the last two decades with a continuous process ofimpoverishment and deteriorating living standards, according to Romania'sLife Quality Research Institute, quoted by the Financiarul daily." [3] Thewestern intelligence officials interviewed in the documentary also revealed howthe Western press played a central role in disinformation. For example, thevictims of Western-backed snipers were photographed by presented to the worldas evidence of a crazed dictator who was "killing his own people". BK: Wait a minute, where did these "Western-backed snipers" comefrom? If you get so much wrong so far, how do we know you are telling us thetruth about the documentary documenting "Western backed snipers." Ihaven't seen any evidence of such a thing yet, let alone any disinformation ofWestern press falsely portraying the victims as evidence of a crazed dictator"killing his own people," though I know of a half dozen suchdictators. To this day, there is a Museum in the back streets of TimisoaraRomania whichpromotes the myth of the "Romanian Revolution". The Arte documentary was one ofthe rare occasions when the mainstream press revealed some of the dark secretsof Western liberal democracy. The documentary caused a scandal when it wasaired in France,with the prestigious Le Monde Diplomatique discussing the moral dilemma of theWest's support of terror in its desire to spread 'democracy'. BK: I thought the West supported terror to in its desire to spread free marketCaptialism and greed and soak up Eastern Oil, and the "democracy" wasjust a ruse. Since the destruction of Libya BK: Libya wasn't destroyed, the city of Misratha and other coastal towns weredestroyed by Gadhafi's military forces, and the cities of Sirte and Ben Waldiwere destroyed by revolutionaries from Misratha, but Tripoli and most citiesare pretty much intact, as the NATO bombing was very precise and destroyedprimarily military targets. and the ongoing cover war on Syria,Le Monde Diplomatique has stood safely on the side of political correction,condemning Bachar Al Assad for the crimes of the DGSEand the CIA. In its current edition, thefront page article reads Ou est la gauche? Where is the left ? Certainly not inthe pages of Le Monde Diplomatique! BK: What does Le MOnde have to do with the snipers? Russia 1993 During Boris Yeltsin's counter-revolution in Russiain 1993, when the Russian parliament was bombed resulting in the deaths ofthousands of people, Yeltsin's counter-revolutionaries made extensive use ofsnipers. According to many eye witness reports, snipers were seen shootingcivilians from the building opposite the USembassy in Moscow. The snipers wereattributed to the Soviet government by the international media.[4] BK: Another fine example of the state security and military snipers killingcivilians as is the situation in almost every case study we have seen. Venezuela 2002 In 2002, the CIA attempted to overthrow HugoChavez, president of Venezuela,in a military coup. On the 11th of April 2002, an opposition March towards the presidential palace wasorganized by the US backed Venezuelan opposition. Snipers hidden in buildingsnear the palace opened fire on protestors killing 18. The Venezuelan andinternational media claimed that Chavez was " killing his own people" therebyjustifying the military coup presented as a humanitarian intervention. It was subsequentlyproved that the coup had been organized by the CIAbut the identity of the snipers was never established. BK: So because the identity of the snipers were never established, the CIAhad its own snipes shoot the opposition marchers it supported? I don't thinkso. I can accept the idea the failed coup was supported if not organized by theCIA, but the snipers who killed 18 peoplewere most definitely Chavez's state security police and/or military, and I'llbet on it. Certainly not "unknown." Thailand April2010 On April 12th 2010,Christian Science Monitor published a detailed report of the riots in Thailandbetween "red-shirt" activists and the Thai government. The article headlineread: 'Thailand'sred shirt protests darken with unknown snipers, parade of coffins'. Like their counterparts in Tunisia,Thailand's redshirts were calling for the resignation of the Thai prime minister. While aheavy-handed response by the Thai security forces to the protestors wasindicated in the report, the government's version of events was also reported:"Mr. Abhisit has used solemn televised addresses to tell his story. He hasblamed rogue gunmen, or "terrorists," for the intense violence (at least 21people died and 800 were injured) and emphasized the need for a fullinvestigation into the killings of both soldiers and protesters. Statetelevision has broadcast repeated images of soldiers coming under fire frombullets and explosives." The CSM report went on to quote Thai militaryofficials and unnamed Western diplomats: "military observers say Thai troopsstumbled into a trap set by agents provocateurs with military expertise. Bypinning down soldiers after dark and sparking chaotic battles with unarmedprotesters, the unknown gunmen ensured heavy casualties on both sides. BK: Yes, "...a trap set by agents provocateurs with militaryexpertise..." - that's military expertise, as in trained by the militaryif not in the military when they were shooting, just like Oswald. Some were caught on camera and seen by reporters, including this one. Sniperstargeted military ground commanders, indicating a degree of advance planningand knowledge of Army movements, say Western diplomats briefed by Thaiofficials. While leaders of the demonstrations have disowned the use offirearms and say their struggle is nonviolent, it is unclear whether radicalsin the movement knew of the trap. BK: Exactly, the demonstrators, as they tried to be in Egyptand Syria, wereclearly non-violent, did not have firearms, disowned them and advocated anonviolent struggle. The snipers are always and clearly state security ormilitary marksmen, not protesters or even revolutionaries, who prefer machineguns, rockets and anti-aircraft guns mounted on technical pickup trucks. "You can't claim to be a peaceful political movement and have an arsenal ofweapons out the back if needed. You can't have it both ways," says a Westerndiplomat in regular contact with protest leaders [5] BK: Exactly, you can't have it both ways, and the snipers are state loyalistsin every case. The CSM article also explores the possibility that the snipers could be rogueelements in the Thai military, agents provocateurs used to justify a crack downon democratic opposition. Thailand'sruling elite is currently coming under pressure from a group called the RedShirts.[6] Kyrgystan June 2010 Ethnic violence broke out in the Central Asian republic of Kirgystan in June 2010. It waswidely reported that unknown snipers opened fire on members of the Uzbekminority in Kyrgystan. Eurasia.net reports: "In many Uzbek mahallas,inhabitants offer convincing testimony of gunmen targeting their neighborhoodsfrom vantage points. Men barricaded into the Arygali Niyazov neighborhood, forexample, testified to seeing gunmen on the upper floors of a nearby medicalinstitute hostel with a view over the district's narrow streets. They said thatduring the height of the violence these gunmen were covering attackers andlooters, assaulting their area with sniper fire. Men in other Uzbek neighborhoodstell similar stories Among the rumours and unconfirmed reports circulating in Kyrgyzstan after the2010 violence were claims that water supplies to Uzbek areas were about to bepoisoned. Such rumours had also been spread against the Ceaucescu regime in Romaniaduring the CIA - backed coup in 1989.Eurasia.net goes on to claim that: "Many people are convinced that they've seenforeign mercenaries acting as snipers. These alleged foreign combatants aredistinguished by their appearance – inhabitants report seeing black snipers andtall, blonde, female snipers from the Baltic states. Theidea that English snipers have been roaming the streets of Oshshooting at Uzbeks is also popular. There've been no independent corroborationsof such sightings by foreign journalists or representatives of internationalorganizations." [7] None of these reports have been independently investigated or corroborated. Itis therefore impossible to draw any hard conclusions from these stories. BK: I think they have been corroborated in Libya,where many of the snipers were black mercenaries from sub-Sahara Africaand many were women Gadhafi had trained to be his personal bodyguard, so whycan't the same tactics be used in Kyrgyzstan?Though it is unlikely since the independent journalists couldn't confirm it asit was confirmed in Libya. Ethnic violence against Uzbek citizens in Kyrgyzstanoccurred pari pasu with a popular revolt against the US-backed regime, whichmany analysts have attributed to the machinations of Moscow. The Bakiyev régime came to power in a CIA-backedpeople-power coup known to the world as the Tulip Revolution in 2005. Locatedto the West of China and bordering Afghanistan,Kyrgyzstanhosts one of America'sbiggest and most important military bases in Central Asia,the Manas Air Base, which is vital for the NATO occupation of neighbouring Afghanistan. Despite initial worries, US/Kyrgyz relations have remained good under theregime of President Roza Otunbayeva. This is not surprising as Otunbayeva hadpreviously participated in the US-created Tulip Revolution in 2004, takingpower as foreign minister. To date no proper investigation has been conductedinto the origins of the ethnic violence that spread throughout the south ofKyryzstan in 2010, nor have the marauding gangs of unknown snipers beenidentified and apprehended. BK: What marauding gangs of unknown snipers? The regime is supported by the USAand the popular unrest is not being supported by CIAbacked "unknown snipers," the supposed topic of this report. Given the geostrategic and geopolitical importance of Kyrgyzstanto both the United Statesand Russia, andthe formers track-record of using death squads to divide and weaken countriesso as to maintain USdomination, USinvolvement in the dissemination of terrorism in Kyrgyzstancannot be ruled out. One effective way of maintaining a grip on Central Asiancountries would be to exacerbate ethnic tensions. In August 6th 2008, theRussian newspaper Kommersant reported that a USarms cache had been found in a house in the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek, which wasbeing rented by two American citizens. The USembassy claimed the arms were being used for "anti-terrorism" exercises.However, this was not confirmed by Kyrgyz authorities. [8] BK: Where's the "unknown snipers" in Kyrgyz, as I haven't seen anyevidence of them yet? Covert USmilitary support to terrorist groups in the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia proved to be aneffective strategy in creating the conditions for "humanitarian" bombing in1999. An effective means of keeping the government in Bishkek firmly on America'sside would be to insist on a USand European presence in the country to help "protect" the Uzbek minority. BK: It would be but wasn't. You can speculate all you want about what couldstart a revolution, but this, as every other example so far, fails to supportthe idea that there are "unknown snipers" supported by the CIAfermenting revolutions. Military intervention similar to that in the former Yugoslaviaby the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europehas already been advocated by the New York Times, whose misleading article onthe riots on June 24th 2010has the headline "Kyrgyzstanasks European Security Body for Police Teams". The article is misleading as theheadline contradicts the actual report which cites a Kyrgyz official stating: "A government spokesman said officials had discussed an outside police presencewith the O.S.C.E., but said he could not confirm that a request for adeployment had been made." There is no evidence in the article of any request by the Kyrgyz government formilitary intervention. In fact, the article presents much evidence to thecontrary. However, before the reader has a chance to read the explanation ofthe Kyrgyz government, the New York Times' writer presents the now all toohorribly familiar narrative of oppressed peoples begging the West to come andbomb or occupy their country: "Ethnic Uzbeks in the south have clamored forinternational intervention. Many Uzbeks said they were attacked in theirneighborhoods not only by civilian mobs, but also by the Kyrgyz military andpolice officers"[9] Only towards the end of the article do we find out that the Kyrgyz authoritiesblamed the US-backed dictator for fomenting ethnic violence in the country,through the use of Islamic jihadists in Uzbekistan. BK: Wait a minute, I don't believe for one minute that the USsupports any Islamic jihadists anywhere, even if Uzbekistan.It's just not true. This policy of using ethnic tension to create an environment of fear in orderto prop up an extremely unpopular dictatorship, the policy of using IslamicJihadism as a political tool to create what former US National Security AdvisorZbigniew Bzrezinski called " an arc of crisis", ties in well with the historyof US involvement in Central Asia from the creation of Al Qaida in Afghanistanin 1978 to the present day. BK: Ah ha, the USA CIA did use al Qaida tofight the Ruskies in Afghanistanwhen there still was a Soviet state, and they won, and now there is no Sovietstate. I'm sure SNV's book details how theUSA CIA supplied them with plenty of sniperrifles, though I haven't seen any evidence of this either. Again, the question persists, who were the "unknown snipers" terrorizing theUzbek population, where did their weapons come from and who would benefit fromethnic conflict in Central Asia's geopoliticalhotspot? BK: I would venture if they existed they were supplied by some national statesecurity or military as they are the most efficient at it, but I don't believethat the snipers are "unknown" at all, but easily identified if youtake the trouble to check them out. Tunisia January2011 On January 16th 2011, CNNreported that ''armed gangs'' were fighting Tunisian security forces. [10] Manyof the murders committed throughout the Tunisian uprising were by "unknownsnipers". There were also videos posted on the internet showing Swedishnationals detained by Tunisian security forces. The men were clearly armed withsniper rifles. Russia Today aired the dramatic pictures.[11] BK: Well we know the Tunisian revolt began in mid-December 2010 with theself-immolation of Mohamid Bouazizi, and that indeed, the protesters who werenot non-violent, did fight, but were not generally armed, and all of thevictims of sniper fire were shot by state security and Tunisian military - some300 victims in all. In spite of articles by professor Michel Chossudovsky, William Engdahl andothers showing how the uprisings in North Africa were following the patterns ofUS backed people-power coups rather than genuinely popular revolutions, BK: These men have not showed any such thing, and those who persist inpromoting the idea that the Arab revolutions were sponsored by the CIAfail to explain how or why the CIA wouldwant to overthrow the dictators like Ben Ali, Mubarak and Gadhafi who they hadalready had deals with and were in bed with and had no motive to see removed,or to stir unrest and turmoil in the region. It only makes sense to those whodon't want to believe that these revolutions are sincere in their goals ofremoving tyrants and establishing a revolutionary democracy, which they havedone so far in Tunisa and Libyaand are trying to do in Egypt,Syria, Bahrainand Yemen. left wing parties and organizations continued to believe the version of eventspresented to them by Al Jazeera and the mainstream press. BK: Yes, Al Jazerra has failed to support the revolt in Bahrainand elsewhere, while it does support the revolts in Libyaand Egypt,according to its Qatarowners. Had the left taken a left from old Lenin's book they would have transposed hiscomments on the February/March revolution in Russia thus: "The whole course ofevents in the January/February Revolution clearly shows that the British,French and American embassies, with their agents and "connections",....directly organized a plot...in conjunction with a section of the generals andarmy and Tunisian garrison officers, with the express object of deposing BenAli" BK: If Lenin was alive he would be disappointed his revolution failed inRussia, and he would be historically wrong if he tried to blame the NorthAfrican revolutions on the French - whose foreign minister was at a Christmasparty with Ben Ali when the revolution broke out, and the French ministeroffered Ben Ali extra tear gas and riot gear if his troops needed it. And the CIAnot only had nothing to do with it, they failed to predict such unrest coulddevelop not only in Tunisiabut in the entire region, a major failure on their part. What the left did not understand is that sometimes it is necessary forimperialism to overthrow some of its clients. A suitable successor to Ben Alicould always be found among the feudalists of the Muslim Brotherhood who nowlook likely to take power. BK: The left fails to understand a lot, but certainly not the ways ofimperialism, that's something only the Russians and the Irish get wrong. In their revolutionary sloganeering and arrogant insistence that the events in Tunisiaand Egypt were"spontaneous and popular uprisings" they committed what Lenin identified as themost dangerous sins in a revolution, namely, the substitution of the abstractfor the concrete. In other words, left wing groups were simply fooled by thesophistication of the Western backed "Arab Spring" events. BK: Yea, you explain Vladimre Lenin to us, and I'll explain John Lennon to you. That is why the violence of the demonstrators and in particular the widespreaduse of snipers possibly linked to Western intelligence was the great unthoughtof the Tunisian uprising. BK: Wait another minute, what do you mean "widespread use of snipespossibly linked to Western intelligence was the great unthought of the Tunisianuprising." After failing to give us one example in a half dozen casestudies of the revolutionaries using "unknown snipers" against thenational security states - including Tunisia, you now say they are"possibly linked to Western intelligence." How's that possible. It'snot to any reasonable person. The same techniques would be used in Libyaa few weeks later, forcing the left to back track and modifiy its initialenthusiasm for the CIA's "ArabSpring". BK: What same technique. None of the Ben Ali or Gadhafi military or loyalistsforces were killed by revolutionary snipers, and the left only had to backtrack in its support for Gadhafi and critiques of NATO. When we are talking about the" left" here, we are referring togenuine left wing parties, that is to say, parties who supported the GreatPeople's Socialist Libyan Arab Jamahirya in their long and brave fight againstWestern imperialism, BK: Yea, we know what you mean, the ones like my friend Cynthia McKinney andWayne Madsen who try to say that Gadhafi was the benevolent dictator who gavefree education to the masses, and make me choke on the repeated slogans likeWestern imperialism. not the infantile petty bourgeois dupes who supported NATO's Benghaziterrorists. BK: Bourgeouis dupes, like Western imperialists, are just overused Pravdacleches that no longer have any meaning, and NATO's Benghaziterrorists are now in power, so we'll just have to see how it plays out, won'twe? The blatant idiocy of such a stance should be crystal clear to anyone whounderstands global politics and class struggle. BK: As only understood by an Irish idiot. Egypt 2011 On October 20th 2011, theTelegraph newspaper published an article entitled, "Our brother died for abetter Egypt".According to the Telegraph, Mina Daniel, an anti-government activist in Cairo,had been 'shot from an unknown sniper, wounding him fatally in the chest"Inexplicably, the article is no longer available on the Telegraph's website foronline perusal. But a google search for 'Egypt,unknown sniper, Telegraph' clearly shows the above quoted explanation for MinaDaniel's death. So, who could these "unknown snipers'' be? On February 6th Al Jazeera reported that Egyptian journalist Ahmad Mahmoud wasshot by snipers as he attempted to cover classes between Egyptian securityforces and protestors. Referring to statements made by Mahmoud's wife EnasAbdel-Alim, the Al Jazeera article insinuates that Mahmoud may have been killedby Egyptian security forces: "Abdel-Alim said several eyewitnesses told her auniformed police captain with Egypt'snotorious Central Security forces yelled at her husband to stop filming. BeforeMahmoud even had a chance to react, she said, a sniper shot him." [12] While the Al Jazeera article advances the theory that the snipers were agentsof the Mubarak regime, their role in the uprising still remains amystery. BK: Who cares what al Jazerra thinks, Mahmoud was shot, without a doubt, by amilitary or state security sniper - and their role in the uprising is nomystery, except to one idiot Irishman. Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based television stations owned by the Emir Hamid BinKhalifa Al Thani, played a key role in provoking protests in Tunisiaand Egyptbefore launching a campaign of unmitigated pro-NATO war propaganda and liesduring the destruction of Libya. BK: Yet Al Jazera remains quiet about the uprising in Bahrainbecause the Qatarowner of Al Jazeera is pals with the dictator of Bahrain,but you are finally right about something - Al Jazeera is propaganda. The Qatari channel been a central participant in the current covert war wagedby NATO agencies and their clients against the Republic of Syria. Al Jazeera's incessantdisinformation against Libya and Syria resulted in the resignation of severalprominent journalists such as Beirut station chief Ghassan Bin Jeddo[13] andsenior Al Jazeera executive Wadah Khanfar who was forced to resign after awikileaks cable revealed he was a co-operating with the Central IntelligenceAgency.[14] Many people were killed during the US-backed colour revolution in Egypt.Although, the killings have been attributed to former USsemi-client Hosni Mubarak, the involvement of Western intelligence cannot beruled out. However, it should be pointed out that the role of unknown snipersin mass demonstrations remains complex and multi-faceted and therefore oneshould not jump to conclusions. BK: That Mubarak was a US client cannot be denied, and there was no reason forUSA CIA to support the revolt in Egypt oranywhere in North Africa, and it should be pointed out that there has so farbeen no examples or case studies shown of any "unknown snipers" sotheir role is not complex and multi-faceted, except in the cluttered mind of anidiot Irishman, so we can certainly jump to that conclusion. For example, after the Bloody Sunday massacre(Domhnach na Fola) in Derry, Ireland 1972, wherepeaceful demonstrators were shot dead by the British army, British officialsclaimed that they had come under fire from snipers. But the 30 year long BloodySunday inquiry subsequently proved this to be false. But the question persistsonce more, who were the snipers in Egyptand whose purposes did they serve? BK: The snipers in Egypt,like the snipers in Tunisiaand Libya werewell trained and equipped military soldiers and state security police officersshooting at unarmed civilians revolutionaries who were trying to peacefullydemonstrate. Their purpose was to kill the opposition to the regime, and theywere very accurate and successful in serving their doomed masters. Libya 2011 During the destabilization of Libya,a video was aired by Al Jazeera purporting to show peaceful "pro-democracy"demonstrators being fired upon by "Gaddafi's forces". The video was edited toconvince the viewer that anti-Gaddafi demonstrators were being murdered by thesecurity forces. However, the unedited version of the video is available onutube. It clearly shows pro-Gaddafi demonstrators with Green flags being firedupon by unknown snipers. The attribution of NATO-linked crimes to the securityforces of the Libyan Jamahirya was a constant feature of the brutal media warwaged against the Libyan people. [15] BK: NATO may have supplied Gadhafi with the sniper rifles, but most of hismilitary and police forces got their weapons from USSR.The revolutionaries did have a lot of the 60 year old Italian Manlicher Carcanorifles left over from the Italian occupation, like that said to have been usedby Oswald to kill President Kennedy, but that rifle was also said to be themost humanitarian weapon ever made because of its inaccuracy. Syria 2011 The people of Syriahave been beset by death squads and snipers since the outbreak of violencethere in March. Hundreds of Syrian soldiers and security personnel have beenmurdered, tortured and mutilated by Salafist and Muslim Brotherhoodmilitants. BK: Yes, the unarmed people of Syriahave been beset by death squads and snipers, to the tune of a dozen a day, andthey are all the victims of Al Assad's military and police. Yet the international media corporations continue to spread the pathetic liethat the deaths are the result Bachar Al Assad's dictatorship. BK: No, that's me saying that, as well as anybody else who has been there andknows the situation except the Idiot Irishman. When I visited Syriain April of this year, I personally encountered merchants and citizens in Hamawho told me they had seen armed terrorists roaming the streets of that oncepeaceful city, terrorizing the neighbourhood. I recall speaking to a fruitseller in the city of Hama whospoke about the horror he had witnessed that day. As he described the scenes ofviolence to me, my attention was arrested by a newspaper headline in Englishfrom the Washington Post shown on Syrian television: "CIAbacks Syrian opposition". The Central Intelligence Agency provides training andfunding for groups who do the bidding of US imperialist interests. The historyof the CIA shows that backing oppositionforces means providing them with arms and finance, actions illegal underinternational law. BK: Who supplied the Syrian regime with sniper rifles, machine guns and gas?Imperalist Russia. A few days later, while at a hostel in the ancient, cultured city of Aleppo,I spoke to a Syrian business man and his family. The business man ran manyhotels in the city and was pro-Assad. BK: Of course all the rich hotel owners support the regime. He told me that he used to watch Al Jazeera television but now had doubts abouttheir honesty. As we conversed, the Al Jazeera television in the backgroundshowed scenes of Syrian soldiers beating and torturing protestors. " Now ifthat is true, it is simply unacceptable" he said. It is sometimes impossible toverify whether the images shown on television are true or not. Many of thecrimes attributed to the Syrian army have been committed by the armed gangs,such as the dumping of mutilated bodies into the river in Hama,presented to the world as more proof of the crimes of the Assad regime. BK: If the mutilated bodies were not dumped by Assad's regime, they were dumpedby his supporters. There is a minority of innocent opponents of the Assad regime who believeeverything they see and hear on Al Jazeera and the other pro-Western satellitestations. These people simply do not understand the intricacies ofinternational politics. BK: How is it that most of the people of Syriaare duped by Al Jazeera but foreign journalists aren't allowed in the countryat all? But the facts on the ground show that most people in Syriasupport the government. BK: Well now we know why we can't believe anything you say. Syrians have access to all internet websites and international TV channels.They can watch BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, readthe New York Times online or Le Monde before tuning into their own state media.In this respect, many Syrians are more informed about international politicsthan the average European or American. Most Europeans and American believetheir own media. Few are capable of reading the Syrian press in original Arabicor watching Syrian television. The Western powers are the masters of discourse,who own the means of communication. The Arab Spring has been the mosthorrifying example of the wanton abuse of this power. BK: The violent attempts to suppress the Arab Spring is the most horrifyingexample of wanton abuse of any power, as we have seen in Tunisa, Egypt, Libya,Syria, Bahrain and Yemen, where the dictators and the "unknownsnipers" are losing in every case, and will lose in the end. Disinformation is effective in sowing the seeds of doubt among those who are seducedby Western propaganda. BK: If the revolutionaries of Tunisa, Egypt,Libya, Bahrain,Yemen and Syriahave been seduced by Western propaganda, its because its so much better thanthis clap trap, as it is apparent that this mick is just mimicking the PravdaParty Line as the Ruskies would have us believe, if they could only convince usthat Lenin was right. Syrian state media has disproved hundreds of Al Jazeera lies since thebeginning of this conflict. BK: Except the one true fact that the Syrian state dictatorship of the Assadfamily dictatorship is kaput, and he will soon end up like Ali, Mubarak andGadhafi, in exile, in jail or dead. Yet the western media has refused to even report the Syrian government'sposition lest fair coverage of the other side of this story encourage a modicumof critical thought in the public mind. BK: Report on the Syrian government's position that the only opposition to itstyranny is from outside foreign agitators who watch Al Jeezera and read the NewYork Times? Conclusion. The use of mercenaries, death squads and snipers by Western intelligenceagencies is well documented. BK: Not by you. I haven't seen one example of a Western intelligence agencysniper - except the one I gave - Oswald - where are the other "welldocumented" cases - just name one, as you haven't done so yet No rational government attempting to stay in power would resort to unknownsnipers to intimidate its opponents. BK: Except in the cases you have documented - Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Syriawhere the state security and military have killed hundreds - in Libyathousands, Shooting at innocent protestors would be counterproductive in the face ofunmitigated pressure from Western governments determined to install a clientregime in Damascus. Shooting of unarmed protestors is only acceptable indictatorships that enjoy the unconditional support of Western governments suchas Bahrain, Hondurasor Colombia. A government which is so massively supported by the population of Syriawould not sabotage its own survival by setting snipers against the protests ofa small minority. BK: You would think so, but its too late to tell that to your pal whose losingpower quickly. The opposition to the Syrian regime is, in fact, miniscule. Tear gas, mass arrestsand other non lethal methods would be perfectly sufficient for a governmentwishing to control unarmed demonstrators. BK: All revolutions are started by minorities - and the radical repression ofit only increases its support and chances of success, as we have seen over andover again, but the dictators never learn. Snipers are used to create terror, fear and anti-regime propaganda. They are anintegral feature of Western sponsored regime change. BK: So far we have only seen snipers used by the loyalist military and securitystate to try to repress and instill fear in the opponents of the regime, notthe other way around. If one were to make a serious criticism of the Syrian government over the pastfew months, it is that they have failed to implement effective anti-terrorismmeasures in the country. BK: No the serious criticism would be their snipers killed too many of theircitizens, as every one killed turned their entire family against the regime, sonow it is doomed. The Syrian people want troops on the streets and the roofs of publicbuildings. BK: The Syrian people don't want troops on the streets or snipers on the roofs- they want stability first, a good economy open to all and not just the regimecronies, and now they want regime change and system change - democracy, freedomand justice, in solidarity with the revolutionaries of Tunisa, Egypt and Libya. In the weeks and months ahead, the Syrian armed forces will probably rely moreand more on their Russian military specialists to strengthen the country'sdefenses as the Western crusade begun in Libyain March spreads to the Levant. BK: You got that right. The Ruskies have a base in Syriaand with China,another dictatorship, they don't have any other friends left, but I would wagerit will be a matter of weeks not months before the regime falls. My Irishbookie will give us some odds if you want to make a bet. There is no conclusive proof that the snipers murdering men, women and childrenin Syria arethe agents of Western imperialism. BK: No, there is conclusive proof they are Syrian military and state securitypolice, using Russian sniper rifles. But there is overwhelming proof that Western imperialism is attempting todestroy the Syrian state. BK: That is no longer just the goal of Western imperialists, but destroying themurderous Syrian state is now the goal of Turkey,the UN, the Arab League and most of the people of Syria. As in Libya,they have never once mentioned the possibility of negotiations between the so-calledopposition and the Syrian government. BK: What, negotiate with Hitler? So he can stay in power? In the name of allthose victims of the "Unknown snipers" the people will never acceptthat now. Assad must go and his whole regime will be deposed and a new systemput in place, but he's good as dead now, thanks in part to his snipers. The West wants regime change and is determined to repeat the slaughter in Libyato achieve this geopolitical objective. It now looks likely that the cradle of civilization and science will be overrunby semi-literate barbarians as the terminal decline of the West plays itselfout in the deserts of the East. BK: I've never read so much clap trap in my life. I don't believe the personwho wrote this even believes it. Edited November 30, 2011 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted December 2, 2011 Author Share Posted December 2, 2011 Part 1 link http://libyancivilwar.blogspot.com/2011/08/tripoli-massacres.html Bad things about the rebels - Rebel Atrocity Videos - Anti-Black Racism Among Libyan Rebels - Refugees and Human Trafficking - Dernah and the al Qaeda Link - Al Qaeda's Flag Over Benghazi VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVooooooooooVVVVVVVVVVVV Part 2 The “Left” and Libya 29 11 2011 by ALEXANDER COCKBURN The last time we met Michael Bérubé on this site was back in 2007, and he was up to his neck in a rubbish dump, where I’d placed him, in the company of other promoters of the 2003 war on Iraq: where, I asked, are those parlor warriors now? Had any of them reconsidered their illusions… “… that all it would take was a brisk invasion and a new constitution, to put Iraq to rights? Have any of them, from Makiya through Hitchens to Berman and Bérubé had dark nights, asking themselves just how much responsibility they have for the heaps of dead in Iraq, for a plundered nation, for the American soldiers who died or were crippled in Iraq at their urging ? Sometimes I dream of them… like characters in a Beckett play, buried up to their necks in a rubbish dump on the edge of Baghdad, reciting their columns to each other as the local women turn over the corpses to see if one of them is her husband or her son.” Who’s this Bérubé, you ask. Well, for starters he’s the Paterno Family Professor in Literature and Director of the Institute for the Arts and Humanities at Pennsylvania State University. Penn State’s website informs us that “named professorships provide support for a focused area and are funded by gifts from individual donors,” which means that Bérubé has long been on Joe Paterno’s payroll – as things have turned out an ironic status for someone who’s spent a fair slice of his time barking and snapping his jaws at “the left” for innumerable failures stemming from moral equivocation and blindness to reality. Now that famed football coach Joe Paterno has been fired from Penn State for protecting one of his assistants, Jerry Sandusky, suspected of raping a ten-year old boy, amidst many other suspected assaults on youths under Sandusky’s supervision, we must await Bérubé’s assessment of how it feels to have been the kept man of this fallen idol. Does the title “Paterno Family Professor” remain ensconced on Bérubé’s formal letterhead? Down the years Bérubé has fostered a niche speciality in trashing what he’s pleased to call “the left,” somewhat in the manner of Todd Gitlin, who – perched on the credential of having once been an SDS president — wrote so many worthy articles bashing this same left in the Sixties and issuing stentorian warnings against any such lapses amid the youth of later epochs that eventually he parlayed his services to decorous establishment thinking into a professorship of journalism and sociology at Columbia University. Now Bérubé has launched an attack on the “left” for its anti-NATO conduct during the recent upheavals in Libya, during which the current National Transitional Council of Libya has been installed under the supervision of this same NATO. On this site this weekend David Gibbs deals capably with some of the major follies in Bérubé’s critique, but since the latter inscribes me in his roster of shame, I think a few comments are in order, starting with the obvious fact that Bérubé, eager to preserve his cred as thoughtful progressive critic of Left Excess, has had recourse to wholesale invention. The most obvious fact about what passes for the Left in the US and Europe regarding the entire Libyan saga was that it was only a few notches short of unanimity in endorsing the entire NATO-backed enterprise. What consistent voices were raised in questioning the premises and applications of the two Security Council resolutions enabling NATO, the factual basis for the reporting coming out of Libya that enabled the near 100 per cent agreement in the press that the UN resolutions justified NATO’s bombing campaign, to avoid “genocide” by Gadhafi “against his own people,” that the credentials and conduct of the rebels, later renamed “revolutionaries” were beyond reproach? Here at CounterPunch some of our contributors such as Vijay Prashad were, initially at least, enthusiastic supporters of the Benghazi rebels. Others, such as myself or Patrick Cockburn, in Libya for the UK Independent, or Diana Johnstone in Paris or Jean Bricmont in Brussels, or Tariq Ali (passim) were critical, raised questions concerning the stentorian pro-NATO chorus. This role is usually regarded as one of the mandates of left journalism. I do not recall CounterPunch as being part of a substantial chorus in this worthy enterprise. In fact I recall us as being among a mere handful on the left, more in concert with a libertarian site like antiwar.com. This is born out by scrutiny of Bérubé’s attack, which is markedly short on names and publications on which to lavish his reprobations of “the left” which, at least prior to the welcome rise of the Occupiers, has been a scrawny thing in recent years. On Amy Goodman’s Democracy Now one was far more likely to hear CIA-consultant Juan Cole issuing fervent support for the entire intervention than rather any vigorous interviewing of informed sources about what was actually happening on the ground in Libya. Failure as concerns Libya’s history this year belongs not to the virtually non-existent left, but to the entire political spectrum from progressives and the whole arc rightwards. A substantial measure of blame must be allocated here to the press, both here and in the U.K. Could it be that the press coverage of NATO’s Libyan onslaught was actually worse than the reporting on NATO’s attacks on the former Yugoslavia in the late 1990s, or on Iraq in the run-up to the 2003 invasion by the U.S.A. and its coalition partners? The answer is yes. In the case of both of the earlier NATO interventions, the debates pro and con were accompanied by many journalistic and official or semi-official investigations, most of them blatantly partisan, but some offering substantive claims about such issues as war crimes, weapons of mass destruction, the actual as opposed to self-proclaimed motives of the assailants, and kindred issues. Mark the contrast with the Libyan intervention. In less than a month, from mid-February to mid-March, we moved from vague allegations of Gaddafi’s supposed “genocide” or “crimes against humanity” to two separate votes in the U.N. Security Council, which permitted a NATO mission to establish a “no-fly” zone to protect civilians, this latter protection to be achieved by “all necessary measures.” By the time U.N. Security Council resolution 1973 had been voted through on March 17, France had already formally recognized the jerry-rigged rebel committee in Benghazi as the legitimate government of Libya. By the end of May, it was being openly stated by senior figures in the relevant NATO governments that “regime change” was the objective and the eviction of Gaddafi a sine qua non of the mission. Also, by late May, it was apparent that the rebels’ military capacities were modest in the extreme, that Ghadafi’s eviction was not going to be the overnight affair, confidently predicted in western capitals and in Benghazi, also that NATO’s bombardments were not having the requisite effect. In the crucial February 15 – March 17 time slot, there was no determined effort to investigate the charges against Ghadafi, leveled in the U.N. Security Council Resolutions and by NATO principals such as Obama and Clinton, the U.K.’s prime minister Cameron, or President Sarkozy and his foreign minister. The amazing vagueness of news stories of this – or indeed any – topic coming out of Libya has been conspicuous. Here, remember, we had a regime accused in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 of “widespread and systematic attacks … against the civilian population [that] may amount to crimes against humanity.” Yet since mid-February the reporting out of Libya displayed a striking lack of persuasive documentation of butcheries or abuses commensurate with the language lavished on the regime’s presumptive conduct. Time and again one read vague phrases like “thousands reportedly killed by Gaddafi’s mercenaries” or Gaddafi “massacring his own people,” delivered without the slightest effort to furnish supporting evidence. It was the secondhand allegation of massacres that drove both news coverage and U.N. activities – particularly in the early stage, when U.N. Resolution 1970 was adopted, calling for sanctions and the referral of Gaddafi’s closest circle to the International Criminal Court. News reports in mid-March, such as those by the McClatchy news chain’s reporters Jonathan Landay, Warren Strobel and Shashank Bengali, contained no claims of anything approaching a “crime against humanity,” the allegation in Resolution 1973. Yet by February 23 the propaganda blitz was in full spate, with Clinton denouncing Gaddafi and with Reagan’s “mad dog of the Middle East” exhumed as the preferred way of describing the Libyan leader. The U.N. commissioner for human rights, Navi Pillay, started denouncing the Libyan government as early as February 18; U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon joined Pillay on February 21. The U.N. News Center reported that Ban was “outraged at press reports that the Libyan authorities have been firing at demonstrators from war planes and helicopters” (our italics). In these early days, no one who represented the Libyan government was permitted to address the council. Only defectors speaking on behalf of Libya were given the floor. Now, remember that on March 10 French President Sarkozy, a major player in NATO’s coalition of the willing against Libya, declared the Libyan National Transition Council the only legitimate representative of the Libyan people. So, Gaddafi was facing a formal armed insurrection – not a protest movement demanding “democracy” – led by a shadowy entity based in Benghazi. Seven days later, Resolution 1973 made clear that attempts to suppress this insurrection would elicit armed intervention by NATO. The political complexion and origins of the rebel leadership and its backers received only fleeting attention. Topics such as the rivalry between the French and Italian oil companies, or the input of other international oil majors, and major U.S. banks and financial institutions were rarely touched upon. The coverage of any fighting was often laughable. The press corps in Benghazi breathlessly described minor skirmishes involving a tank or two, or some armed vehicles, as mighty engagements. In fact, the mighty armies contending along the highway west of Benghazi would melt into the bleachers at a college baseball game. News stories suggest mobile warfare on the scale of the epic dramas of the Kursk salient or the battle for Stalingrad in World War Two. By the end of June the “no-fly zone” prompted some 12,000-plus NATO sorties. As with any bombing, civilians died. Since the beginning of NATO operations, a total of 12,887 sorties, including 4,850 strike sorties, were conducted up to June 27. A team of Russian doctors wrote to the president of the Russian Federation, Dmitry Medvedev, as follows: “Today, 24 March, 2011, NATO aircraft and the U.S. all night and all morning bombed a suburb of Tripoli – Tajhura (where, in particular, is Libya’s Nuclear Research Center). Air Defense and Air Force facilities in Tajhura were destroyed back in the first 2 days of strikes and more active military facilities in the city remained, but today the object of bombing are barracks of the Libyan army, around which are densely populated residential areas, and, next to it, the largest of Libya’s Heart Centers. Civilians and the doctors could not assume that common residential quarters will be about to become destroyed, so none of the residents or hospital patients was evacuated. “Bombs and rockets struck residential houses and fell near the hospital. The glass of the Cardiac Center building was broken, and in the building of the maternity ward for pregnant women with heart disease a wall collapsed and part of the roof. This resulted in ten miscarriages whereby babies died, the women are in intensive care, doctors are fighting for their lives. Our colleagues and we are working seven days a week, to save people. This is a direct consequence of falling bombs and missiles in residential buildings, resulting in dozens of deaths and injuries, which are operated and reviewed now by our doctors. Such a large number of wounded and killed, as during today, did not occur during the total of all the riots in Libya. And this is called ‘protecting’ the civilian population?” With the Libyan intervention, everything was out of proportion. Gaddafi was scarcely the acme of monstrosity conjured up by Obama or Mrs. Clinton or Sarkozy. In four decades, Libyans rose from being among the most wretched in Africa to considerable elevation in terms of social amenities. In a detailed fairly recent report (“The Situation of Children and Women in Libya,” UNICEF Middle East and North Africa Regional Office, November 2010), UNICEF noted that Libya had important socio-economic achievements to its credit. In 2009 it enjoyed: a buoyant growth rate, with GDP having risen from $27.3 billion in 1998 to $93.2 billion by 2009, according to the World Bank; high per capita income (estimated by the World Bank at $16,430);high literacy rates (95 per cent for males and 78 per cent for females, aged fifteen and above); high life expectancy at birth (74 years overall; 77 for females and 72 for males) and a consequent ranking of 55 out of 182 countries in terms of overall “Human Development” In terms of the distribution of oil revenues it would be instructive to compare Libya’s record to those of other oil-producing nations. Gaddafi’s alleged slaughter of his own people, and alleged ordering of mass rapes, formed the sharp edge of the interventionist crusade and of the Security Council resolutions, draped with the imprimatur of the collusive International Criminal Court. These charges were endlessly recycled by the press, without any serious attempt at verification. By mid-to-late June, human rights organizations were casting doubt on claims of mass rape and other abuses perpetrated by forces loyal to Gaddafi. An investigation by Amnesty International failed to find evidence for these human rights violations and in many cases has discredited or cast doubt on them. It also found indications that, on several occasions, the rebels in Benghazi appeared to have knowingly made false claims or manufactured evidence. The findings by the investigators were sharply at odds with the views of the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, who told a press conference that “we have information that there was a policy to rape in Libya those who were against the government. Apparently he [Colonel Gaddafi] used it to punish people.” U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she was “deeply concerned” that Gaddafi’s troops were participating in widespread rape in Libya. “Rape, physical intimidation, sexual harassment, and even so-called virginity tests have taken place in countries throughout the region,” she said. Donatella Rovera, senior crisis response adviser for Amnesty, who was in Libya for three months after the start of the uprising, said to Patrick Cockburn in late June that “we have not found any evidence or a single victim of rape, or a doctor who knew about somebody being raped.” She stressed this does not prove that mass rape did not occur, but there is no evidence to show that it did. Liesel Gerntholtz, head of women’s rights at Human Rights Watch, which also investigated the charge of mass rape, said, “We have not been able to find evidence.” In one instance, two captured pro-Gaddafi soldiers presented to the international media by the rebels claimed that [added] their officers, and later themselves, had raped a family with four daughters. Ms. Rovera says that when she and a colleague, both fluent in Arabic, interviewed the two detainees, one 17 years old and one 21, alone and in separate rooms, they changed their stories and gave differing accounts of what had happened. “They both said they had not participated in the rape and just heard about it,” she said. “They told different stories about whether or not the girls’ hands were tied, whether their parents were present, and about how they were dressed.” Seemingly the strongest evidence for mass rape appeared to come from a Libyan psychologist, Dr. Seham Sergewa, who says she distributed 70,000 questionnaires in rebel-controlled areas and along the Tunisian border, of which over 60,000 were returned. Some 259 women volunteered that they had been raped, of whom Dr. Sergewa said she interviewed 140 victims. Asked by Diana Eltahawy, Amnesty International’s specialist on Libya, if it would be possible to meet any of these women, Dr. Sergewa replied that “she had lost contact with them,” and was unable to provide documentary evidence. The accusation that Viagra had been distributed to Gaddafi’s troops to encourage them to rape women in rebel areas first surfaced in March, after NATO had destroyed tanks advancing on Benghazi. Ms. Rovera says that rebels dealing with the foreign media in Benghazi started showing journalists packets of Viagra, claiming they came from burned-out tanks, though it is unclear why the packets were not charred. Rebels repeatedly charged that mercenary troops from Central and West Africa had been used against them. The Amnesty investigation found there was no evidence for this. “Those shown to journalists as foreign mercenaries were later quietly released,” says Ms. Rovera. “Most were sub-Saharan migrants working in Libya without documents.” Others were not so lucky and were lynched or executed. Ms. Rovera found two bodies of migrants in the Benghazi morgue, and others were dumped on the outskirts of the city. She says, “The politicians kept talking about mercenaries, which inflamed public opinion, and the myth has continued because they were released without publicity.” One story, to which credence was given by the foreign media early on in Benghazi, was that eight to ten government troops who refused to shoot protesters were executed by their own side. Their bodies were shown on TV. But Ms. Rovera, says there is strong evidence for a different explanation. She says amateur video shows them alive after they had been captured, suggesting it was the rebels who killed them. NATO intervention started on March 19 with air attacks to “protect” people in Benghazi from massacre by advancing pro-Gaddafi troops. There is no doubt that civilians did expect to be killed after threats of vengeance from Gaddafi. During the first days of the uprising in eastern Libya, security forces shot and killed demonstrators and people attending their funerals, but there is no proof of mass killing of civilians on the scale of Syria or Yemen. Most of the fighting during the first days of the uprising was in Benghazi, where 100 to 110 people were killed, and in the city of Baida to the east, where 59 to 64 were killed, says Amnesty. Most of these were probably protesters, though some may have obtained weapons. There is no evidence that aircraft or heavy anti-aircraft machine guns were used against crowds. Spent cartridges picked up after protesters were shot at came from Kalashnikovs or similar caliber weapons. The Amnesty findings confirmed a report by the International Crisis Group, which found that while the Gaddafi regime had a history of brutally repressing opponents, there was no question of “genocide.” The report adds that “much Western media coverage has from the outset presented a very one-sided view of the logic of events, portraying the protest movement as entirely peaceful and repeatedly suggesting that the regime’s security forces were unaccountably massacring unarmed demonstrators who presented no security challenge.” With so many countries out of bounds, journalists flocked to Benghazi, in Libya, which can be reached from Egypt without a visa. Alternatively they went to Tripoli, where the government allows a carefully monitored press corps to operate under strict supervision. Having arrived in these two cities, the ways in which the journalists report diverged sharply. Everybody reporting out of Tripoli expressed understandable skepticism about what government minders seek to show them as regards civilian casualties caused by NATO air strikes or demonstrations of support for Gaddafi. By way of contrast, the foreign press corps in Benghazi, capital of the rebel-held territory, shows surprising credulity toward more subtle but equally self-serving stories from the rebel government or its sympathizers. The Libyan insurgents were adept at dealing with the press from an early stage, and this included skilful propaganda to put the blame for unexplained killings on the other side. It is a weakness of journalists that they give wide publicity to atrocities, evidence for which may be shaky when first revealed. But when the stories turn out to be untrue or exaggerated, they rate scarcely a mention. It is all credit to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch that they have taken a skeptical attitude to atrocities until proven. Contrast this responsible attitude with that of Hillary Clinton or the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Luis Moreno-Ocampo, who blithely suggested that Gaddafi was using rape as a weapon of war to punish the rebels This systematic demonization of Gaddafi – a brutal despot he may be, but not a monster on the scale of Saddam Hussein – also made it difficult to negotiate a ceasefire with him. There is nothing particularly surprising about the rebels in Benghazi making things up or producing dubious witnesses to Gaddafi’s crimes. They were fighting a war against a despot whom they feared and hated, and they understandably used propaganda as a weapon of war. But it did show naivety on the part of the foreign media, who almost universally sympathize with the rebels, to the extent that they swallowed whole so many atrocity stories fed to them by the rebel authorities and their sympathizers. The only massacre by the Gaddafi regime, involving hundreds of victims, which is so far well attested is the killings at Abu Salim prison in Tripoli in 1996, when up to 1,200 prisoners died, according to a credible witness who survived. Battlefronts are always awash with rumors of impending massacre or rape, which spread rapidly among terrified people who may be the intended victims. Understandably enough, they do not want to wait around to find out how true these stories are. Earlier this year, Patrick Cockburn was in Ajdabiyah, a front-line town an hour and a half’s drive south of Benghazi, when he saw car loads of panic-stricken refugees fleeing up the road. They had just heard an entirely untrue report via al-Jazeera Arabic that pro-Gaddafi forces had broken through. Likewise, al-Jazeera was producing uncorroborated reports of hospitals being attacked, blood banks destroyed, women raped, and the injured executed. This toxic mixture of cheerleading and willful blindness persisted through to the end – though now stories do appear about the summary executions, revenge killings and mass imprisonments that are occurring. These are the real failures, to which Bérubé is indifferent, just as he is indifferent to and entirely ignorant of Libyan history, past and present. His mandate is to issue his pro-forma denunciation of “the left,” an excerise in data-free ranting. By way of an antidote I strongly recommend a fine piece in the London Review of Books by Hugh Roberts, who was the director of the International Crisis Group’s North Africa Project from 2002 to 2007 and from February to July 2011. Roberts is about to take up the post of Edward Keller Professor of North African and Middle Eastern History at Tufts University. A couple of samples: “The claim that the ‘international community’ had no choice but to intervene militarily and that the alternative was to do nothing is false. An active, practical, non-violent alternative was proposed, and deliberately rejected. The argument for a no-fly zone and then for a military intervention employing ‘all necessary measures’ was that only this could stop the regime’s repression and protect civilians. Yet many argued that the way to protect civilians was not to intensify the conflict by intervening on one side or the other, but to end it by securing a ceasefire followed by political negotiations. A number of proposals were put forward. The International Crisis Group, for instance, where I worked at the time, published a statement on 10 March arguing for a two-point initiative: (i) the formation of a contact group or committee drawn from Libya’s North African neighbours and other African states with a mandate to broker an immediate ceasefire; (ii) negotiations between the protagonists to be initiated by the contact group and aimed at replacing the current regime with a more accountable, representative and law-abiding government. This proposal was echoed by the African Union and was consistent with the views of many major non-African states – Russia, China, Brazil and India, not to mention Germany and Turkey. It was restated by the ICG in more detail (adding provision for the deployment under a UN mandate of an international peacekeeping force to secure the ceasefire) in an open letter to the UN Security Council on 16 March, the eve of the debate which concluded with the adoption of UNSC Resolution 1973. In short, before the Security Council voted to approve the military intervention, a worked-out proposal had been put forward which addressed the need to protect civilians by seeking a rapid end to the fighting, and set out the main elements of an orderly transition to a more legitimate form of government, one that would avoid the danger of an abrupt collapse into anarchy, with all it might mean for Tunisia’s revolution, the security of Libya’s other neighbours and the wider region. The imposition of a no-fly zone would be an act of war: as the US defense secretary, Robert Gates, told Congress on 2 March, it required the disabling of Libya’s air defences as an indispensable preliminary. In authorising this and ‘all necessary measures’, the Security Council was choosing war when no other policy had even been tried. Why? Resolution 1973 was passed in New York late in the evening of 17 March. The next day, Gaddafi, whose forces were camped on the southern edge of Benghazi, announced a ceasefire in conformity with Article 1 and proposed a political dialogue in line with Article 2. What the Security Council demanded and suggested, he provided in a matter of hours. His ceasefire was immediately rejected on behalf of the NTC by a senior rebel commander, Khalifa Haftar, and dismissed by Western governments. ‘We will judge him by his actions not his words,’ David Cameron declared, implying that Gaddafi was expected to deliver a complete ceasefire by himself: that is, not only order his troops to cease fire but ensure this ceasefire was maintained indefinitely despite the fact that the NTC was refusing to reciprocate. Cameron’s comment also took no account of the fact that Article 1 of Resolution 1973 did not of course place the burden of a ceasefire exclusively on Gaddafi. No sooner had Cameron covered for the NTC’s unmistakable violation of Resolution 1973 than Obama weighed in, insisting that for Gaddafi’s ceasefire to count for anything he would (in addition to sustaining it indefinitely, single-handed, irrespective of the NTC) have to withdraw his forces not only from Benghazi but also from Misrata and from the most important towns his troops had retaken from the rebellion, Ajdabiya in the east and Zawiya in the west – in other words, he had to accept strategic defeat in advance. These conditions, which were impossible for Gaddafi to accept, were absent from Article 1. (1) Demands the immediate establishment of a ceasefire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians;…” And here’s Roberts concerning the influential charge that Gadhafi had ordered the slaughtering of his fellow Libyans from the air, plus his conclusion: In the days that followed I made efforts to check the al-Jazeera story [about Ghadafi bombing Libyans] for myself. One source I consulted was the well-regarded blog Informed Comment, maintained and updated every day by Juan Cole, a Middle East specialist at the University of Michigan. This carried a post on 21 February entitled ‘Qaddafi’s bombardments recall Mussolini’s’, which made the point that ‘in 1933-40, Italo Balbo championed aerial warfare as the best means to deal with uppity colonial populations.’ The post began: ‘The strafing and bombardment in Tripoli of civilian demonstrators by Muammar Gaddafi’s fighter jets on Monday …’, with the underlined words linking to an article by Sarah El Deeb and Maggie Michael for Associated Press published at 9 p.m. on 21 February. This article provided no corroboration of Cole’s claim that Gaddafi’s fighter jets (or any other aircraft) had strafed or bombed anyone in Tripoli or anywhere else. The same is true of every source indicated in the other items on Libya relaying the aerial onslaught story which Cole posted that same day. I was in Egypt for most of the time, but since many journalists visiting Libya were transiting through Cairo, I made a point of asking those I could get hold of what they had picked up in the field. None of them had found any corroboration of the story. I especially remember on 18 March asking the British North Africa expert Jon Marks, just back from an extended tour of Cyrenaica (taking in Ajdabiya, Benghazi, Brega, Derna and Ras Lanuf), what he had heard about the story. He told me that no one he had spoken to had mentioned it. Four days later, on 22 March, USA Today carried a striking article by Alan Kuperman, the author of The Limits of Humanitarian Intervention and coeditor of Gambling on Humanitarian Intervention. The article, ‘Five Things the US Should Consider in Libya’, provided a powerful critique of the Nato intervention as violating the conditions that needed to be observed for a humanitarian intervention to be justified or successful. But what interested me most was his statement that ‘despite ubiquitous cellphone cameras, there are no images of genocidal violence, a claim that smacks of rebel propaganda.’ So, four weeks on, I was not alone in finding no evidence for the aerial slaughter story. I subsequently discovered that the issue had come up more than a fortnight earlier, on 2 March, in hearings in the US Congress when Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, were testifying. They told Congress that they had no confirmation of reports of aircraft controlled by Gaddafi firing on citizens…. The idea that Gaddafi represented nothing in Libyan society, that he was taking on his entire people and his people were all against him was another distortion of the facts. As we now know from the length of the war, the huge pro-Gaddafi demonstration in Tripoli on 1 July, the fierce resistance Gaddafi’s forces put up, the month it took the rebels to get anywhere at all at Bani Walid and the further month at Sirte, Gaddafi’s regime enjoyed a substantial measure of support, as the NTC did. Libyan society was divided and political division was in itself a hopeful development since it signified the end of the old political unanimity enjoined and maintained by the Jamahiriyya. In this light, the Western governments’ portrayal of ‘the Libyan people’ as uniformly ranged against Gaddafi had a sinister implication, precisely because it insinuated a new Western-sponsored unanimity back into Libyan life. This profoundly undemocratic idea followed naturally from the equally undemocratic idea that, in the absence of electoral consultation or even an opinion poll to ascertain the Libyans’ actual views, the British, French and American governments had the right and authority to determine who was part of the Libyan people and who wasn’t. No one supporting the Gaddafi regime counted. Because they were not part of ‘the Libyan people’ they could not be among the civilians to be protected, even if they were civilians as a matter of mere fact. And they were not protected; they were killed by Nato air strikes as well as by uncontrolled rebel units. The number of such civilian victims on the wrong side of the war must be many times the total death toll as of 21 February. But they don’t count, any more than the thousands of young men in Gaddafi’s army who innocently imagined that they too were part of ‘the Libyan people’ and were only doing their duty to the state counted when they were incinerated by Nato’s planes or extra-judicially executed en masse after capture, as in Sirte. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted December 12, 2011 Author Share Posted December 12, 2011 For a sniper's view of Misrahta see: Revolutionary Program BK: I would venture that half of the casualties of the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Syira so far have been caused by regime loyalist snipers, and this fact has not been really looked into or given the analysis it deserves. I repost this totally ridiculous "historical review and analysis" with my commentary, because I think the topic of snipers is important and should be focused on in more depth and detail, but not in the same frame as this Russian Pravda Party Line by an idiot Irishman. Unknown Snipers and Western backed "Regime Change" A Historical Review and Analysis by Gearóid Ó Colmáin http://www.globalres...xt=va&aid=27904 Unknown snipers played a pivotal role throughout the so-called "Arab Spring Revolutions" yet, in spite of reports of their presence in the mainstream media, surprisingly little attention has been paid to to their purpose androle. BK: There were daily reports of the snipers in every media, and a number of reporters were shot by snipers, including Franklin Lamb, a Gadhafi Loyalist who was shot in the leg outside his hotel by a Gadhafi sniper perched in theTripoli Marriott hotel, which up to then had received very little damage. Afterwards, it was probably pummeled by return rebel fire. Snipers took a very heavy toll on the rebel forces and probably account for half of the casualties in the Battles of Misratha and Sirte. Some of the women snipers in Sirte were later captured alive, and all were loyalists, and their purpose and role was to kill all the rebel rats at Gadhafi's orders. The Russian investigative journalist Nikolay Starikov has written a book which discusses the role of unknown snipers in the destabilization of countries targeted for regime change by the United States and its allies. BK Notes: Starikov Nikolai Viktorovich (August 23 1970, Leningrad) — is a Russian writer and opinion journalist who describes his works as"historically political detective", a thrilling mix of geopolitics,economics, history of Russiaand different countries and bases his historical books on memoirs ofparticipants and eyewitnesses of a described event. Starikov is the organizerof the "Goebbels' Award", which is awarded to "people who lieabout, slander and vilify Russia". His Blog - http://nstarikov.ru/en/ There's also a list of books by SNVat Wiki but no book on snipers, as referred to by the author.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Starikov Romania 1989. In Susanne Brandstätter's documentary 'Checkmate: Strategy of a Revolution'aired on Arte television station some years ago, Western intelligence officials revealed how death squads were used to destabilize Romania and turn its people against the head of state Nicolai Ceaucescu. Brandstätter's film is a must see for anyone interested in how Western intelligence agencies, human rights groups and the corporate press collude in the systematic destruction of countries whose leadership conflicts with the interests of big capital and empire. BK: I hope her film is easier to find than SNV'sbook on snipers. If anyone can find a reference to Starikov's book on snipers please send it to me at: Bkjfk3@yahoo.com thanks. Former secret agent with the French secret service, the DGSE(LaDirection générale de la sécurité extérieure) Dominique Fonvielle, spoke candidlyabout the role of Western intelligence operatives in destabilizing the Romanian population. "How do you organize a revolution? I believe the first step is to locate oppositional forces in a given country. It is sufficient to have a highly developed intelligence service in order to determine which people are credible enough to have influence at their hands to destabilize the people to the disadvantage of the ruling regime"[2] BK:Yes this is all true, from the perspective of a foreign intelligence officer,but not that of the domestic revolutionary who wants to overthrow the existing regime. Fonvielle certainly wouldn't consider Mohamid Bouazizi, who sparked the revolution in Tunisia,as being "credible enough to have influence at their hands to destabilize the people," so his comment can't be attributed to the Arab revolution in Tunisiaor any where for that matter. This open and rare admission of Western sponsorship of terrorism was justified on the grounds of the "greater good" brought to Romaniaby free-market capitalism. It was necessary, according to the strategists of Romania's"revolution", for some people to die. BK: Yes, it is the admission of state sponsorship of terrorism, though I think he was speaking in generalities and not specifics, and didn't mention motive,or capitalism. Today, Romaniaremains one of the poorest countries in Europe. A reporton Euractiv reads: "Most Romanians associate the last two decades with a continuous process ofimpoverishment and deteriorating living standards, according to Romania'sLife Quality Research Institute, quoted by the Financiarul daily." [3] Thewestern intelligence officials interviewed in the documentary also revealed howthe Western press played a central role in disinformation. For example, thevictims of Western-backed snipers were photographed by presented to the worldas evidence of a crazed dictator who was "killing his own people". BK: Wait a minute, where did these "Western-backed snipers" comefrom? If you get so much wrong so far, how do we know you are telling us thetruth about the documentary documenting "Western backed snipers." Ihaven't seen any evidence of such a thing yet, let alone any disinformation ofWestern press falsely portraying the victims as evidence of a crazed dictator"killing his own people," though I know of a half dozen suchdictators. To this day, there is a Museum in the back streets of TimisoaraRomania whichpromotes the myth of the "Romanian Revolution". The Arte documentary was one ofthe rare occasions when the mainstream press revealed some of the dark secretsof Western liberal democracy. The documentary caused a scandal when it wasaired in France,with the prestigious Le Monde Diplomatique discussing the moral dilemma of theWest's support of terror in its desire to spread 'democracy'. BK: I thought the West supported terror to in its desire to spread free marketCaptialism and greed and soak up Eastern Oil, and the "democracy" wasjust a ruse. Since the destruction of Libya BK: Libya wasn't destroyed, the city of Misratha and other coastal towns weredestroyed by Gadhafi's military forces, and the cities of Sirte and Ben Waldiwere destroyed by revolutionaries from Misratha, but Tripoli and most citiesare pretty much intact, as the NATO bombing was very precise and destroyedprimarily military targets. and the ongoing cover war on Syria,Le Monde Diplomatique has stood safely on the side of political correction,condemning Bachar Al Assad for the crimes of the DGSEand the CIA. In its current edition, thefront page article reads Ou est la gauche? Where is the left ? Certainly not inthe pages of Le Monde Diplomatique! BK: What does Le MOnde have to do with the snipers? Russia 1993 During Boris Yeltsin's counter-revolution in Russiain 1993, when the Russian parliament was bombed resulting in the deaths ofthousands of people, Yeltsin's counter-revolutionaries made extensive use ofsnipers. According to many eye witness reports, snipers were seen shootingcivilians from the building opposite the USembassy in Moscow. The snipers wereattributed to the Soviet government by the international media.[4] BK: Another fine example of the state security and military snipers killingcivilians as is the situation in almost every case study we have seen. Venezuela 2002 In 2002, the CIA attempted to overthrow HugoChavez, president of Venezuela,in a military coup. On the 11th of April 2002, an opposition March towards the presidential palace wasorganized by the US backed Venezuelan opposition. Snipers hidden in buildingsnear the palace opened fire on protestors killing 18. The Venezuelan andinternational media claimed that Chavez was " killing his own people" therebyjustifying the military coup presented as a humanitarian intervention. It was subsequentlyproved that the coup had been organized by the CIAbut the identity of the snipers was never established. BK: So because the identity of the snipers were never established, the CIAhad its own snipes shoot the opposition marchers it supported? I don't thinkso. I can accept the idea the failed coup was supported if not organized by theCIA, but the snipers who killed 18 peoplewere most definitely Chavez's state security police and/or military, and I'llbet on it. Certainly not "unknown." Thailand April2010 On April 12th 2010,Christian Science Monitor published a detailed report of the riots in Thailandbetween "red-shirt" activists and the Thai government. The article headlineread: 'Thailand'sred shirt protests darken with unknown snipers, parade of coffins'. Like their counterparts in Tunisia,Thailand's redshirts were calling for the resignation of the Thai prime minister. While aheavy-handed response by the Thai security forces to the protestors wasindicated in the report, the government's version of events was also reported:"Mr. Abhisit has used solemn televised addresses to tell his story. He hasblamed rogue gunmen, or "terrorists," for the intense violence (at least 21people died and 800 were injured) and emphasized the need for a fullinvestigation into the killings of both soldiers and protesters. Statetelevision has broadcast repeated images of soldiers coming under fire frombullets and explosives." The CSM report went on to quote Thai militaryofficials and unnamed Western diplomats: "military observers say Thai troopsstumbled into a trap set by agents provocateurs with military expertise. Bypinning down soldiers after dark and sparking chaotic battles with unarmedprotesters, the unknown gunmen ensured heavy casualties on both sides. BK: Yes, "...a trap set by agents provocateurs with militaryexpertise..." - that's military expertise, as in trained by the militaryif not in the military when they were shooting, just like Oswald. Some were caught on camera and seen by reporters, including this one. Sniperstargeted military ground commanders, indicating a degree of advance planningand knowledge of Army movements, say Western diplomats briefed by Thaiofficials. While leaders of the demonstrations have disowned the use offirearms and say their struggle is nonviolent, it is unclear whether radicalsin the movement knew of the trap. BK: Exactly, the demonstrators, as they tried to be in Egyptand Syria, wereclearly non-violent, did not have firearms, disowned them and advocated anonviolent struggle. The snipers are always and clearly state security ormilitary marksmen, not protesters or even revolutionaries, who prefer machineguns, rockets and anti-aircraft guns mounted on technical pickup trucks. "You can't claim to be a peaceful political movement and have an arsenal ofweapons out the back if needed. You can't have it both ways," says a Westerndiplomat in regular contact with protest leaders [5] BK: Exactly, you can't have it both ways, and the snipers are state loyalistsin every case. The CSM article also explores the possibility that the snipers could be rogueelements in the Thai military, agents provocateurs used to justify a crack downon democratic opposition. Thailand'sruling elite is currently coming under pressure from a group called the RedShirts.[6] Kyrgystan June 2010 Ethnic violence broke out in the Central Asian republic of Kirgystan in June 2010. It waswidely reported that unknown snipers opened fire on members of the Uzbekminority in Kyrgystan. Eurasia.net reports: "In many Uzbek mahallas,inhabitants offer convincing testimony of gunmen targeting their neighborhoodsfrom vantage points. Men barricaded into the Arygali Niyazov neighborhood, forexample, testified to seeing gunmen on the upper floors of a nearby medicalinstitute hostel with a view over the district's narrow streets. They said thatduring the height of the violence these gunmen were covering attackers andlooters, assaulting their area with sniper fire. Men in other Uzbek neighborhoodstell similar stories Among the rumours and unconfirmed reports circulating in Kyrgyzstan after the2010 violence were claims that water supplies to Uzbek areas were about to bepoisoned. Such rumours had also been spread against the Ceaucescu regime in Romaniaduring the CIA - backed coup in 1989.Eurasia.net goes on to claim that: "Many people are convinced that they've seenforeign mercenaries acting as snipers. These alleged foreign combatants aredistinguished by their appearance – inhabitants report seeing black snipers andtall, blonde, female snipers from the Baltic states. Theidea that English snipers have been roaming the streets of Oshshooting at Uzbeks is also popular. There've been no independent corroborationsof such sightings by foreign journalists or representatives of internationalorganizations." [7] None of these reports have been independently investigated or corroborated. Itis therefore impossible to draw any hard conclusions from these stories. BK: I think they have been corroborated in Libya,where many of the snipers were black mercenaries from sub-Sahara Africaand many were women Gadhafi had trained to be his personal bodyguard, so whycan't the same tactics be used in Kyrgyzstan?Though it is unlikely since the independent journalists couldn't confirm it asit was confirmed in Libya. Ethnic violence against Uzbek citizens in Kyrgyzstanoccurred pari pasu with a popular revolt against the US-backed regime, whichmany analysts have attributed to the machinations of Moscow. The Bakiyev régime came to power in a CIA-backedpeople-power coup known to the world as the Tulip Revolution in 2005. Locatedto the West of China and bordering Afghanistan,Kyrgyzstanhosts one of America'sbiggest and most important military bases in Central Asia,the Manas Air Base, which is vital for the NATO occupation of neighbouring Afghanistan. Despite initial worries, US/Kyrgyz relations have remained good under theregime of President Roza Otunbayeva. This is not surprising as Otunbayeva hadpreviously participated in the US-created Tulip Revolution in 2004, takingpower as foreign minister. To date no proper investigation has been conductedinto the origins of the ethnic violence that spread throughout the south ofKyryzstan in 2010, nor have the marauding gangs of unknown snipers beenidentified and apprehended. BK: What marauding gangs of unknown snipers? The regime is supported by the USAand the popular unrest is not being supported by CIAbacked "unknown snipers," the supposed topic of this report. Given the geostrategic and geopolitical importance of Kyrgyzstanto both the United Statesand Russia, andthe formers track-record of using death squads to divide and weaken countriesso as to maintain USdomination, USinvolvement in the dissemination of terrorism in Kyrgyzstancannot be ruled out. One effective way of maintaining a grip on Central Asiancountries would be to exacerbate ethnic tensions. In August 6th 2008, theRussian newspaper Kommersant reported that a USarms cache had been found in a house in the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek, which wasbeing rented by two American citizens. The USembassy claimed the arms were being used for "anti-terrorism" exercises.However, this was not confirmed by Kyrgyz authorities. [8] BK: Where's the "unknown snipers" in Kyrgyz, as I haven't seen anyevidence of them yet? Covert USmilitary support to terrorist groups in the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia proved to be aneffective strategy in creating the conditions for "humanitarian" bombing in1999. An effective means of keeping the government in Bishkek firmly on America'sside would be to insist on a USand European presence in the country to help "protect" the Uzbek minority. BK: It would be but wasn't. You can speculate all you want about what couldstart a revolution, but this, as every other example so far, fails to supportthe idea that there are "unknown snipers" supported by the CIAfermenting revolutions. Military intervention similar to that in the former Yugoslaviaby the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europehas already been advocated by the New York Times, whose misleading article onthe riots on June 24th 2010has the headline "Kyrgyzstanasks European Security Body for Police Teams". The article is misleading as theheadline contradicts the actual report which cites a Kyrgyz official stating: "A government spokesman said officials had discussed an outside police presencewith the O.S.C.E., but said he could not confirm that a request for adeployment had been made." There is no evidence in the article of any request by the Kyrgyz government formilitary intervention. In fact, the article presents much evidence to thecontrary. However, before the reader has a chance to read the explanation ofthe Kyrgyz government, the New York Times' writer presents the now all toohorribly familiar narrative of oppressed peoples begging the West to come andbomb or occupy their country: "Ethnic Uzbeks in the south have clamored forinternational intervention. Many Uzbeks said they were attacked in theirneighborhoods not only by civilian mobs, but also by the Kyrgyz military andpolice officers"[9] Only towards the end of the article do we find out that the Kyrgyz authoritiesblamed the US-backed dictator for fomenting ethnic violence in the country,through the use of Islamic jihadists in Uzbekistan. BK: Wait a minute, I don't believe for one minute that the USsupports any Islamic jihadists anywhere, even if Uzbekistan.It's just not true. This policy of using ethnic tension to create an environment of fear in orderto prop up an extremely unpopular dictatorship, the policy of using IslamicJihadism as a political tool to create what former US National Security AdvisorZbigniew Bzrezinski called " an arc of crisis", ties in well with the historyof US involvement in Central Asia from the creation of Al Qaida in Afghanistanin 1978 to the present day. BK: Ah ha, the USA CIA did use al Qaida tofight the Ruskies in Afghanistanwhen there still was a Soviet state, and they won, and now there is no Sovietstate. I'm sure SNV's book details how theUSA CIA supplied them with plenty of sniperrifles, though I haven't seen any evidence of this either. Again, the question persists, who were the "unknown snipers" terrorizing theUzbek population, where did their weapons come from and who would benefit fromethnic conflict in Central Asia's geopoliticalhotspot? BK: I would venture if they existed they were supplied by some national statesecurity or military as they are the most efficient at it, but I don't believethat the snipers are "unknown" at all, but easily identified if youtake the trouble to check them out. Tunisia January2011 On January 16th 2011, CNNreported that ''armed gangs'' were fighting Tunisian security forces. [10] Manyof the murders committed throughout the Tunisian uprising were by "unknownsnipers". There were also videos posted on the internet showing Swedishnationals detained by Tunisian security forces. The men were clearly armed withsniper rifles. Russia Today aired the dramatic pictures.[11] BK: Well we know the Tunisian revolt began in mid-December 2010 with theself-immolation of Mohamid Bouazizi, and that indeed, the protesters who werenot non-violent, did fight, but were not generally armed, and all of thevictims of sniper fire were shot by state security and Tunisian military - some300 victims in all. In spite of articles by professor Michel Chossudovsky, William Engdahl andothers showing how the uprisings in North Africa were following the patterns ofUS backed people-power coups rather than genuinely popular revolutions, BK: These men have not showed any such thing, and those who persist inpromoting the idea that the Arab revolutions were sponsored by the CIAfail to explain how or why the CIA wouldwant to overthrow the dictators like Ben Ali, Mubarak and Gadhafi who they hadalready had deals with and were in bed with and had no motive to see removed,or to stir unrest and turmoil in the region. It only makes sense to those whodon't want to believe that these revolutions are sincere in their goals ofremoving tyrants and establishing a revolutionary democracy, which they havedone so far in Tunisa and Libyaand are trying to do in Egypt,Syria, Bahrainand Yemen. left wing parties and organizations continued to believe the version of eventspresented to them by Al Jazeera and the mainstream press. BK: Yes, Al Jazerra has failed to support the revolt in Bahrainand elsewhere, while it does support the revolts in Libyaand Egypt,according to its Qatarowners. Had the left taken a left from old Lenin's book they would have transposed hiscomments on the February/March revolution in Russia thus: "The whole course ofevents in the January/February Revolution clearly shows that the British,French and American embassies, with their agents and "connections",....directly organized a plot...in conjunction with a section of the generals andarmy and Tunisian garrison officers, with the express object of deposing BenAli" BK: If Lenin was alive he would be disappointed his revolution failed inRussia, and he would be historically wrong if he tried to blame the NorthAfrican revolutions on the French - whose foreign minister was at a Christmasparty with Ben Ali when the revolution broke out, and the French ministeroffered Ben Ali extra tear gas and riot gear if his troops needed it. And the CIAnot only had nothing to do with it, they failed to predict such unrest coulddevelop not only in Tunisiabut in the entire region, a major failure on their part. What the left did not understand is that sometimes it is necessary forimperialism to overthrow some of its clients. A suitable successor to Ben Alicould always be found among the feudalists of the Muslim Brotherhood who nowlook likely to take power. BK: The left fails to understand a lot, but certainly not the ways ofimperialism, that's something only the Russians and the Irish get wrong. In their revolutionary sloganeering and arrogant insistence that the events in Tunisiaand Egypt were"spontaneous and popular uprisings" they committed what Lenin identified as themost dangerous sins in a revolution, namely, the substitution of the abstractfor the concrete. In other words, left wing groups were simply fooled by thesophistication of the Western backed "Arab Spring" events. BK: Yea, you explain Vladimre Lenin to us, and I'll explain John Lennon to you. That is why the violence of the demonstrators and in particular the widespreaduse of snipers possibly linked to Western intelligence was the great unthoughtof the Tunisian uprising. BK: Wait another minute, what do you mean "widespread use of snipespossibly linked to Western intelligence was the great unthought of the Tunisianuprising." After failing to give us one example in a half dozen casestudies of the revolutionaries using "unknown snipers" against thenational security states - including Tunisia, you now say they are"possibly linked to Western intelligence." How's that possible. It'snot to any reasonable person. The same techniques would be used in Libyaa few weeks later, forcing the left to back track and modifiy its initialenthusiasm for the CIA's "ArabSpring". BK: What same technique. None of the Ben Ali or Gadhafi military or loyalistsforces were killed by revolutionary snipers, and the left only had to backtrack in its support for Gadhafi and critiques of NATO. When we are talking about the" left" here, we are referring togenuine left wing parties, that is to say, parties who supported the GreatPeople's Socialist Libyan Arab Jamahirya in their long and brave fight againstWestern imperialism, BK: Yea, we know what you mean, the ones like my friend Cynthia McKinney andWayne Madsen who try to say that Gadhafi was the benevolent dictator who gavefree education to the masses, and make me choke on the repeated slogans likeWestern imperialism. not the infantile petty bourgeois dupes who supported NATO's Benghaziterrorists. BK: Bourgeouis dupes, like Western imperialists, are just overused Pravdacleches that no longer have any meaning, and NATO's Benghaziterrorists are now in power, so we'll just have to see how it plays out, won'twe? The blatant idiocy of such a stance should be crystal clear to anyone whounderstands global politics and class struggle. BK: As only understood by an Irish idiot. Egypt 2011 On October 20th 2011, theTelegraph newspaper published an article entitled, "Our brother died for abetter Egypt".According to the Telegraph, Mina Daniel, an anti-government activist in Cairo,had been 'shot from an unknown sniper, wounding him fatally in the chest"Inexplicably, the article is no longer available on the Telegraph's website foronline perusal. But a google search for 'Egypt,unknown sniper, Telegraph' clearly shows the above quoted explanation for MinaDaniel's death. So, who could these "unknown snipers'' be? On February 6th Al Jazeera reported that Egyptian journalist Ahmad Mahmoud wasshot by snipers as he attempted to cover classes between Egyptian securityforces and protestors. Referring to statements made by Mahmoud's wife EnasAbdel-Alim, the Al Jazeera article insinuates that Mahmoud may have been killedby Egyptian security forces: "Abdel-Alim said several eyewitnesses told her auniformed police captain with Egypt'snotorious Central Security forces yelled at her husband to stop filming. BeforeMahmoud even had a chance to react, she said, a sniper shot him." [12] While the Al Jazeera article advances the theory that the snipers were agentsof the Mubarak regime, their role in the uprising still remains amystery. BK: Who cares what al Jazerra thinks, Mahmoud was shot, without a doubt, by amilitary or state security sniper - and their role in the uprising is nomystery, except to one idiot Irishman. Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based television stations owned by the Emir Hamid BinKhalifa Al Thani, played a key role in provoking protests in Tunisiaand Egyptbefore launching a campaign of unmitigated pro-NATO war propaganda and liesduring the destruction of Libya. BK: Yet Al Jazera remains quiet about the uprising in Bahrainbecause the Qatarowner of Al Jazeera is pals with the dictator of Bahrain,but you are finally right about something - Al Jazeera is propaganda. The Qatari channel been a central participant in the current covert war wagedby NATO agencies and their clients against the Republic of Syria. Al Jazeera's incessantdisinformation against Libya and Syria resulted in the resignation of severalprominent journalists such as Beirut station chief Ghassan Bin Jeddo[13] andsenior Al Jazeera executive Wadah Khanfar who was forced to resign after awikileaks cable revealed he was a co-operating with the Central IntelligenceAgency.[14] Many people were killed during the US-backed colour revolution in Egypt.Although, the killings have been attributed to former USsemi-client Hosni Mubarak, the involvement of Western intelligence cannot beruled out. However, it should be pointed out that the role of unknown snipersin mass demonstrations remains complex and multi-faceted and therefore oneshould not jump to conclusions. BK: That Mubarak was a US client cannot be denied, and there was no reason forUSA CIA to support the revolt in Egypt oranywhere in North Africa, and it should be pointed out that there has so farbeen no examples or case studies shown of any "unknown snipers" sotheir role is not complex and multi-faceted, except in the cluttered mind of anidiot Irishman, so we can certainly jump to that conclusion. For example, after the Bloody Sunday massacre(Domhnach na Fola) in Derry, Ireland 1972, wherepeaceful demonstrators were shot dead by the British army, British officialsclaimed that they had come under fire from snipers. But the 30 year long BloodySunday inquiry subsequently proved this to be false. But the question persistsonce more, who were the snipers in Egyptand whose purposes did they serve? BK: The snipers in Egypt,like the snipers in Tunisiaand Libya werewell trained and equipped military soldiers and state security police officersshooting at unarmed civilians revolutionaries who were trying to peacefullydemonstrate. Their purpose was to kill the opposition to the regime, and theywere very accurate and successful in serving their doomed masters. Libya 2011 During the destabilization of Libya,a video was aired by Al Jazeera purporting to show peaceful "pro-democracy"demonstrators being fired upon by "Gaddafi's forces". The video was edited toconvince the viewer that anti-Gaddafi demonstrators were being murdered by thesecurity forces. However, the unedited version of the video is available onutube. It clearly shows pro-Gaddafi demonstrators with Green flags being firedupon by unknown snipers. The attribution of NATO-linked crimes to the securityforces of the Libyan Jamahirya was a constant feature of the brutal media warwaged against the Libyan people. [15] BK: NATO may have supplied Gadhafi with the sniper rifles, but most of hismilitary and police forces got their weapons from USSR.The revolutionaries did have a lot of the 60 year old Italian Manlicher Carcanorifles left over from the Italian occupation, like that said to have been usedby Oswald to kill President Kennedy, but that rifle was also said to be themost humanitarian weapon ever made because of its inaccuracy. Syria 2011 The people of Syriahave been beset by death squads and snipers since the outbreak of violencethere in March. Hundreds of Syrian soldiers and security personnel have beenmurdered, tortured and mutilated by Salafist and Muslim Brotherhoodmilitants. BK: Yes, the unarmed people of Syriahave been beset by death squads and snipers, to the tune of a dozen a day, andthey are all the victims of Al Assad's military and police. Yet the international media corporations continue to spread the pathetic liethat the deaths are the result Bachar Al Assad's dictatorship. BK: No, that's me saying that, as well as anybody else who has been there andknows the situation except the Idiot Irishman. When I visited Syriain April of this year, I personally encountered merchants and citizens in Hamawho told me they had seen armed terrorists roaming the streets of that oncepeaceful city, terrorizing the neighbourhood. I recall speaking to a fruitseller in the city of Hama whospoke about the horror he had witnessed that day. As he described the scenes ofviolence to me, my attention was arrested by a newspaper headline in Englishfrom the Washington Post shown on Syrian television: "CIAbacks Syrian opposition". The Central Intelligence Agency provides training andfunding for groups who do the bidding of US imperialist interests. The historyof the CIA shows that backing oppositionforces means providing them with arms and finance, actions illegal underinternational law. BK: Who supplied the Syrian regime with sniper rifles, machine guns and gas?Imperalist Russia. A few days later, while at a hostel in the ancient, cultured city of Aleppo,I spoke to a Syrian business man and his family. The business man ran manyhotels in the city and was pro-Assad. BK: Of course all the rich hotel owners support the regime. He told me that he used to watch Al Jazeera television but now had doubts abouttheir honesty. As we conversed, the Al Jazeera television in the backgroundshowed scenes of Syrian soldiers beating and torturing protestors. " Now ifthat is true, it is simply unacceptable" he said. It is sometimes impossible toverify whether the images shown on television are true or not. Many of thecrimes attributed to the Syrian army have been committed by the armed gangs,such as the dumping of mutilated bodies into the river in Hama,presented to the world as more proof of the crimes of the Assad regime. BK: If the mutilated bodies were not dumped by Assad's regime, they were dumpedby his supporters. There is a minority of innocent opponents of the Assad regime who believeeverything they see and hear on Al Jazeera and the other pro-Western satellitestations. These people simply do not understand the intricacies ofinternational politics. BK: How is it that most of the people of Syriaare duped by Al Jazeera but foreign journalists aren't allowed in the countryat all? But the facts on the ground show that most people in Syriasupport the government. BK: Well now we know why we can't believe anything you say. Syrians have access to all internet websites and international TV channels.They can watch BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, readthe New York Times online or Le Monde before tuning into their own state media.In this respect, many Syrians are more informed about international politicsthan the average European or American. Most Europeans and American believetheir own media. Few are capable of reading the Syrian press in original Arabicor watching Syrian television. The Western powers are the masters of discourse,who own the means of communication. The Arab Spring has been the mosthorrifying example of the wanton abuse of this power. BK: The violent attempts to suppress the Arab Spring is the most horrifyingexample of wanton abuse of any power, as we have seen in Tunisa, Egypt, Libya,Syria, Bahrain and Yemen, where the dictators and the "unknownsnipers" are losing in every case, and will lose in the end. Disinformation is effective in sowing the seeds of doubt among those who are seducedby Western propaganda. BK: If the revolutionaries of Tunisa, Egypt,Libya, Bahrain,Yemen and Syriahave been seduced by Western propaganda, its because its so much better thanthis clap trap, as it is apparent that this mick is just mimicking the PravdaParty Line as the Ruskies would have us believe, if they could only convince usthat Lenin was right. Syrian state media has disproved hundreds of Al Jazeera lies since thebeginning of this conflict. BK: Except the one true fact that the Syrian state dictatorship of the Assadfamily dictatorship is kaput, and he will soon end up like Ali, Mubarak andGadhafi, in exile, in jail or dead. Yet the western media has refused to even report the Syrian government'sposition lest fair coverage of the other side of this story encourage a modicumof critical thought in the public mind. BK: Report on the Syrian government's position that the only opposition to itstyranny is from outside foreign agitators who watch Al Jeezera and read the NewYork Times? Conclusion. The use of mercenaries, death squads and snipers by Western intelligenceagencies is well documented. BK: Not by you. I haven't seen one example of a Western intelligence agencysniper - except the one I gave - Oswald - where are the other "welldocumented" cases - just name one, as you haven't done so yet No rational government attempting to stay in power would resort to unknownsnipers to intimidate its opponents. BK: Except in the cases you have documented - Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Syriawhere the state security and military have killed hundreds - in Libyathousands, Shooting at innocent protestors would be counterproductive in the face ofunmitigated pressure from Western governments determined to install a clientregime in Damascus. Shooting of unarmed protestors is only acceptable indictatorships that enjoy the unconditional support of Western governments suchas Bahrain, Hondurasor Colombia. A government which is so massively supported by the population of Syriawould not sabotage its own survival by setting snipers against the protests ofa small minority. BK: You would think so, but its too late to tell that to your pal whose losingpower quickly. The opposition to the Syrian regime is, in fact, miniscule. Tear gas, mass arrestsand other non lethal methods would be perfectly sufficient for a governmentwishing to control unarmed demonstrators. BK: All revolutions are started by minorities - and the radical repression ofit only increases its support and chances of success, as we have seen over andover again, but the dictators never learn. Snipers are used to create terror, fear and anti-regime propaganda. They are anintegral feature of Western sponsored regime change. BK: So far we have only seen snipers used by the loyalist military and securitystate to try to repress and instill fear in the opponents of the regime, notthe other way around. If one were to make a serious criticism of the Syrian government over the pastfew months, it is that they have failed to implement effective anti-terrorismmeasures in the country. BK: No the serious criticism would be their snipers killed too many of theircitizens, as every one killed turned their entire family against the regime, sonow it is doomed. The Syrian people want troops on the streets and the roofs of publicbuildings. BK: The Syrian people don't want troops on the streets or snipers on the roofs- they want stability first, a good economy open to all and not just the regimecronies, and now they want regime change and system change - democracy, freedomand justice, in solidarity with the revolutionaries of Tunisa, Egypt and Libya. In the weeks and months ahead, the Syrian armed forces will probably rely moreand more on their Russian military specialists to strengthen the country'sdefenses as the Western crusade begun in Libyain March spreads to the Levant. BK: You got that right. The Ruskies have a base in Syriaand with China,another dictatorship, they don't have any other friends left, but I would wagerit will be a matter of weeks not months before the regime falls. My Irishbookie will give us some odds if you want to make a bet. There is no conclusive proof that the snipers murdering men, women and childrenin Syria arethe agents of Western imperialism. BK: No, there is conclusive proof they are Syrian military and state securitypolice, using Russian sniper rifles. But there is overwhelming proof that Western imperialism is attempting todestroy the Syrian state. BK: That is no longer just the goal of Western imperialists, but destroying themurderous Syrian state is now the goal of Turkey,the UN, the Arab League and most of the people of Syria. As in Libya,they have never once mentioned the possibility of negotiations between the so-calledopposition and the Syrian government. BK: What, negotiate with Hitler? So he can stay in power? In the name of allthose victims of the "Unknown snipers" the people will never acceptthat now. Assad must go and his whole regime will be deposed and a new systemput in place, but he's good as dead now, thanks in part to his snipers. The West wants regime change and is determined to repeat the slaughter in Libyato achieve this geopolitical objective. It now looks likely that the cradle of civilization and science will be overrunby semi-literate barbarians as the terminal decline of the West plays itselfout in the deserts of the East. BK: I've never read so much clap trap in my life. I don't believe the personwho wrote this even believes it. VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVooooooooVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV =============================================================== ----------------------------o---------------------------------- related link http://poorrichards-blog.blogspot.com/2011/12/syria-unknown-snipers-and-western.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 (edited) I don't know why I waste my time setting you straight Steve, but I keep looking for the evidence that the Arab Spring uprisings were sparked by the CIA or NATO Psy-Ops, and have yet to be given one example or any evidence, so why keep posting headlines that aren't supported by what is under them? - BK Revolutionary Program "Arab Spring": Spontaneous Popular Uprising orUS-NATO Sponsored Psy Op? by Adrian Salbuchi http://globalresearc...xt=va&aid=27839 "Arab Springs" are not as spontaneous as theWestern mainstream media would have us believe. Their behind-the-scenes instigators always get "a little help from their Global Power Elite mega-planningfriends..." BK: Salbuchi, please supply one example of a "behind the scenes instigator" in the Arab spring - other than al Jazerra. Thanks. Isn't it rather odd that after long decades of slumber, starting in early 2011 millions upon millions of Arabs throughout North Africa and the Middle East suddenly woke up, took to the streets, violently clashed with police and security forces, overthrew their governments and in one instance - Libya -managed to deliver their country to a perverse alliance of foreign terrorists, local thugs, CIA operatives and NATO bombers, eventually murdering their own exceptional leader, Muammar Gaddafi, live on global TV? BK: Yes, it is odd, but No, they weren't awaken by the CIA psy ops, and it ididn't start in early 2011- it began precisely on Dec. 17, 2010 when Mohamed Bouaziz set himself on fire in protest - over economic policies and local Tunisian police state brutality, and the violent suppression of the protests he started led to the overthrow of the dictator of Tunisia, and from there spread to Egypt, Libya, and it continues today in Bahrain, Yemen, Syria and other countries. It was because of the exceptional leader Muammar Gaddafi's violent crackdown on his own people that permitted his former NATO friends to bomb him. I have not seen any evidence of any CIA operatives involved on the ground, yet, but would like to if anyone could provide it. Mohamed Bouazizi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Question: just how spontaneous are these major social convulsions that lead torevolution, chaos, battles on streets and squares, thousands dead and injured,and the violent overthrow of entire governments? To a certain degree they are,no doubt, spontaneous: people are growing weary of their national governments'growing inability to resolve vital collective problems. BK: Bouazizi's act, and the protests that followed were certainly spontaneous, what was not was the violent suppression of the protests, which should be expected, even though it has been shown that it is the very suppression of the small numbers of original protesters that stimulate more people to join the revolt. In fact, a survey of public opinion in anycountry in the world will show that, on average, half the population rejectstheir on-going governments, and even their entire political classes. The morelucid and aware see them all as mere puppets subordinated to Money Power elitesin one form or another: whether banking cartels, oil and mining companies,media moguls, domestic and foreign lobbies, or a wide array of war-mongers.Because it's not just the streets of Cairo, Tripoli, Damascus or Benghazi thatare in turmoil, but also the streets of New York, London, Oakland, Madrid,Athens and Rome. BK:Yes, the success of the protests in Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and elsewhere has inspired young people to protest in Spain, USA and even Russia, but certainly the CIA and NATO did not instigate a regional Arab revolution in order to spark similar protests elsewhere. This destroys the original statement and argument that the CIA is behind the unrest. Uncannily, the standard image of social violence is the sameeverywhere: disgruntled, exasperated, impoverished protesters clashing withpolice and security forces: sad scenes of the poor fighting the poor... whilstone can imagine mega-bankers looking down from their 50th floor boardrooms,sipping their whisky and laughing at the scene down there... BK: The protesters in Egypt and USA are hardly impoverished, as they organized themselves over the internet, all have cell phones and while most are out of work, they are still middle-class with tents, sleeping bags and money. What is different, then, about today'soptimistic sounding "Arab Spring"? Basically, that ready-to-happencivil commotions and popular uprisings are purposely and maliciously beingtriggered by well-trained, well-financed, well-supported foreign and domesticagitators and agents, who have vested interests in destabilizing countries inthat region to promote their own agendas, totally unrelated to the NationalInterest of the locals. BK: Where are these well-trained, well-financed, well-supported foreign and domestic agitators and agents? I don't see any of them, or even one example of them. There were no foreign agitators in Tunisia, other than the French foreign minister who was on holiday with the dictator. The USA supported Gadhafi until he turned his military against his own people, not CIA agents. The CIA, USA and NATO had no motive to overthrow any of the dictators, who they were already in bed with and got all the oil they wanted. They have a very different axe to grind, aligned to theinterests of specific foreign powers - notably the US, UK, Israel, France, EUcountries and their regional pawns in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, Kuwait -where the Global Power Elite is embedded. In fact, this is a whole new form of wagingwar based on PsyWar (psychological warfare), where the mainstream global mediabecome veritable weapons of mass mental destruction of people's ability to seeand understand what is really being done to them. As with all wars, itsobjective is conquest and control of entire countries and regions. BK: In fact, the PsyWar that had previously been used in Guatemala, Cuba, Hungry, Poland, USSR, etc. was nowhere to be seen in Tunisa, Egypt or Libya, where the government was friendly with USA and NATO, and the conquest and control was already accomplished. This article and the following one, which implies that like the exceptional Gadhafi, the dictator of Syria still has the support of his people - and appears to be Russian dizinformation, as there has yet to be one example of CIA operational psy-war influence in any of these conflicts, and I am looking for them. Modern war is waged by powerful nations onfive different overlapping, holistic levels of aggression against weaker,appetizing countries, ranging from stark naked aggression to subtle subversion: 1. Military Invasion - Allows direct controlby fully overthrowing and overpowering the target nation. It has one majordrawback: it looks really bad on the evening news. Today, this applies to Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine; Libya is a moving target... BK: There was no military invasion of Libya, like the USA invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, the terrorists groups invaded Palestine, and the invading force occupies the country. It just didn't happen. 2. Military Coup - Identifies and supportsdomestic military/civilian allies and traitors willing to support a foreignpower against their own people. Latin America saw US-backed coupsin the 60's and 70's in Chile, Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia, Argentina... Now we seem to beseeing this in Egypt. BK: Military Coup is how Gadhafi assumed power in 1969. 3. Financial Coup - Banking cartels corner anygovernment they please to do "the Global Power Elite's bidding orelse..!" Examples: Argentina's 2001/2 collapse,preceded by Mexico (1997), Russia (1998), Brazil (1999). Today: Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Iceland... Instead of tanks,they use the IMF, World Bank, US Treasury, ECB... BK: The financial situation of Mohamid Bouazizi led to the original revolt in Tunisa, and the failure of the dictatorships to open their economy to the ordinary people led to their demise. 4. Political Coup - Flexibly uses combinationsof "crises" to impose unelected governments such as TrilateralistsMario Monti in Italy, and Lucas Papademosin Greece... 5. Social Coup - Today's PsyWar. First you mapout internal social grievances and woes, strife and ancestral hatreds, then youpin the fault on a suitable scapegoat/patsy, then you support and arm domesticand foreign agitators and "freedom fighters", ensuring that theWestern Media clearly tell the world who are the "good guys" and whothe "bad guys". BK: No, you can't map out and pin the fault on anybody but the leaders - the dictators, the person - I almost said people, but in each and every country it is ONE person - the dictator, who think they OWN the country and are addicted to the power they've held for years, in some cases, decades. And nobody needs to be told who the good guys and the bad guy are - the ones who control the police state and military and doing the killing are the bad guys. Today, the "Arab Spring". Tomorrow, maybewe'll see "Latin American Springs" or "South East AsianSprings..." or "Former Soviet Republics Springs..." BK: I think Africa spring, but it will take the African people themselves to get rid of all their dictators. Manycountries today fit one of these categories and/or a combination of several ofthem, escalating to/descending from one to another. Egypt began as a"Category 5" and escalated to a "Category 2". Libya also began as a"Category 5" and was bombed into a veritable "Category 1". Macro-management by the Global Power Elite isgoverned by their specific goals and interests in each country, because theystill need a strong US, a nuclear Israel and a stable Germany, but they definitelydo not want a strong Russia and China, a nuclear Iran and a stable Latin America... Like HurricaneWatches in the Caribbean, maybe we should start mapping out PoliticalRegime Change Watches on a regional, even global, basis. It would certainlyhelp in tracking the dark clouds of war, death and destruction that aregathering. Adrian Salbuchi is a political analyst, author, speaker and radio/TV commentator in Argentina.www.asalbuchi.com.ar BK: AND HERE WE HAVE MORE FROM OUR IRISH FRIEND GERRY O'COLMAIN - THE IRISH IDIOT WHO WENT LOOKING FOR THE "UNKNOWN SNIPERS" AND COULDN'T FIND THEM, OR FIGURE OUT THEY ARE TRAINED BY THE MILITARY AND SHOOT CIVILIANS IN EVERY COUNTRY WHERE WE HAVE SEEN THEM SO FAR. - By Gearóid Ó Colmáin http://poorrichards-...nd-western.html The people of Syriahave been beset by death squads and snipers since the outbreak of violencethere in March. BK: That much is true. Hundreds of Syrian soldiers and security personnel have beenmurdered, tortured and mutilated by Salafist and Muslim Brotherhood militants.Yet the international media corporations continue to spread the pathetic liethat the deaths are the result Bachar Al Assad's dictatorship. BK: There has been an average of two dozen civilians killed every day in Syria, and not by the Salafist or Muslim Brotherhood militants, but by the Syrian soldiers and security personnel - some of whom have defected to the Free Syrian Army and have begun to fight back. The Muslim Brotherhood, as in Egypt, refused to join the peaceful protests and demonstrations. When I visited Syriain April of this year, I personally encountered merchants and citizens in Hamawho told me they had seen armed terrorists roaming the streets of that oncepeaceful city, terrorizing the neighbourhood. I recall speaking to a fruitseller in the city of Hama whospoke about the horror he had witnessed that day. BK: Mohamid Bouazizi was a college educated fruit seller who wanted to sell his fruit but the police state refused to let him. As he described the scenes ofviolence to me, my attention was arrested by a newspaper headline in Englishfrom the Washington Post shown on Syrian television: "CIAbacks Syrian opposition". The Central Intelligence Agency provides training andfunding for groups who do the bidding of US imperialist interests. The historyof the CIA shows that backing oppositionforces means providing them with arms and finance, actions illegal underinternational law. BK: Thank God the CIA is on the right side for a change, and if the front page of the Washington Post is your primary source for information about Syria while you are in Syria, then you don't know what you are talking about - but we already knew that. A few days later, while at a hostel in the ancient, cultured city of Aleppo,I spoke to a Syrian business man and his family. The business man ran manyhotels in the city and was pro-Assad. He told me that he used to watch AlJazeera television but now had doubts about their honesty. As we conversed, theAl Jazeera television in the background showed scenes of Syrian soldiersbeating and torturing protestors. " Now if that is true, it is simplyunacceptable" he said. It is sometimes impossible to verify whether the imagesshown on television are true or not. Many of the crimes attributed to theSyrian army have been committed by the armed gangs, such as the dumping ofmutilated bodies into the river in Hama,presented to the world as more proof of the crimes of the Assad regime. BK: Al Jazerra is controlled by the dictator of Qatar, we know that, and its reporting is biased, we know that, but just because they show Syrian soldiers killing Syrian civilians doesn't mean that it was staged or didn't happen. We know it happens at least two dozen times a day, a daily crime stat that you can depend on. We don't depend on Al Jazerra to provide the proof of Assad's crimes, we know all too well of what he's done. There is a minority of innocent opponents of the Assad regime who believeeverything they see and hear on Al Jazeera and the other pro-Western satellitestations. These people simply do not understand the intricacies ofinternational politics. But the facts on the ground show that most people in Syriasupport the government. BK: Why doesn't he just have an election then? Well, subtracting two dozen people a day from the equasion and maybe someday Assad will once again have a majority. Syrians have access to all internet websites andinternational TV channels. They can watch BBC,CNN, Al Jazeera, read the New York Times online or Le Monde before tuning intotheir own state media. BK: And they have the CIA and Washington Post to tell them Assad is a killer dictator, what more do they need? In this respect, many Syrians are more informed aboutinternational politics than the average European or American. BK: Those who know any of the victims and martyrs of the revolution certainly are more knowledgeable than us. Most Europeansand American believe their own media. Few are capable of reading the Syrianpress in original Arabic or watching Syrian television. The Western powers arethe masters of discourse, who own the means of communication. The Arab Springhas been the most horrifying example of the wanton abuse of this power. BK: Wait a minute, I thought the new, social media, with Twitters, Facebook and Youtube cell phones were the primary means of communicating among the revolutionaries in every country, and it was liberating them from the confines of the mass media and international networks and allowing them to communicate one on one with each other and show the world what was happening unfiltered by the mainstream media? Disinformation is effective in sowing the seeds of doubt among those who areseduced by Western propaganda. BK: I for one haven't been seduced by western media, but by the courage, inspiration and intellect of the new, young revolutionaries who are overthrowing dictators in one country after another. Syrian state media has disproved hundreds of AlJazeera lies since the beginning of this conflict. BK: I thought we agreed not to trust Al Jazerra? Yet the western media hasrefused to even report the Syrian government's position lest fair coverage ofthe other side of this story encourage a modicum of critical thought in thepublic mind. BK: What do you mean the western media has refused to even report the Syrian government's position? I thought Assad was interviewed by Barbara Walters on international television the other day, and he said he doesn't control the military? Doesn't that count as encouraging a modicum of critical thought in the public mind? And I've left the comments section in because it reflects the reality of the situation: Anonymous said... Allow me to say that you are a piece of sh.... and a cheapshill you son of a whore. The only crimninals in the whole deal is the regimeof the mother xxxxer Bashar Asad you support. Like Gaddafi, whom you supportedwholeheartedly, you're supporting the criminal against humanity Asad and hiscriminal killers. There are no salafists, or islamists in Syriayou mother xxxxer. A bird can't fly in Syriawithout permission from the criminal government. Stop brain washing peoplemind. December 11, 2011 1:08 PM Anonymous said... YOU MUST BE FU....ING ISRAELI AGENT, YOU AREMOTHER FU...ER STUPID ASS. CAN'T YOU SEE WHATJEWS AND AMERICAN CIAARE DOING IN MIDDLE EAST FOR PAST 70 YEARS.YOU ARE DUMB ASS. December 11, 2011 2:12 PM Anonymous said... those who write pretending knowledge of Syriaare either ignorant or working for gangs like the one in Syria.if you check your data well and read the history of Hafiz Assad and his brotherRifaat you will, if you are really seeking the truth, know that Assad came todo a job in destroying Syria.he came in a military coup,1970, by 1975, he destroyed political life,education, economy, and the syrian social structure. he dismissed theconscientious high ranking officers in the syrian army, encouraged the sectarianaffiliation of his own sect in the army. only they could get promotions tohigher ranks.etc.. 1982 over 40.000 people were murdered in Hamasaying they were Muslim Brothers, which was a lie. when his son came to power,the constitution was changed in minutes to make it possible for him to bepresident, no elections, no law in syria, only the poor have to abide by thelaw, while those who are at the top of the pyramid can do anything, exempttheir sons from joining the army. they made education a farce by infiltratingthe end of year questions in higher education and secondary schools. the momentyou enter syriaas a syrian they make you feel like a criminal, of course only if you aresyrian. they are a gang looting and spreading corruption with impunity. whenthe Criminal Bashar Assad came to power people were optimistic. he lied to themsaying he would establish democracy and open the country and fight corruption.but what happened? since he came, the economy was looted by his family, andRami Makhloof his cousin is an example. he is not even forty years old, andsince 2001, his fortune is estimated to be over 35% of the syrian economy. heworked hard right? I could write and write but I can't finish telling you about the brutality ofthis regime, who turned the country into a gang land, humiliated theintellectuals, imprisoned those who still have integrity, killed his opponentsin European cities and at home. ask about Riad Alturk, 20 years in prison.Salah Albitar, who was assassinated in Paris.the killing in Lebanon,Iraq,and the palestinians. please Mr. knowledge, go and revise your data. if yousupport a gang join them, they will make you rich. Long live the syrian revolution. Long live Diraa, Homs, Hama.and allthe other syrian cities. yours from alSuweida. the town which is still to show its integrity andcourage. <a href="http://poorrichards-blog.blogspot.com/2011/12/syria-unknown-snipers-and-western.html?showComment=1323651148931#c807406882547900017" title="comment permalink">December 11, 2011 4:52 PM Edited December 12, 2011 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted December 12, 2011 Author Share Posted December 12, 2011 (edited) I don't know why I waste my time setting you straight Steve, but I keep looking for the evidence that the Arab Spring uprisings were sparked by the CIA or NATO Psy-Ops, and have yet to be given one example or any evidence, so why keep posting headlines that aren't supported by what is under them? - BK Revolutionary Program "Arab Spring": Spontaneous Popular Uprising orUS-NATO Sponsored Psy Op? by Adrian Salbuchi http://globalresearc...xt=va&aid=27839 "Arab Springs" are not as spontaneous as theWestern mainstream media would have us believe. Their behind-the-scenes instigators always get "a little help from their Global Power Elite mega-planningfriends..." BK: Salbuchi, please supply one example of a "behind the scenes instigator" in the Arab spring - other than al Jazerra. Thanks. Isn't it rather odd that after long decades of slumber, starting in early 2011 millions upon millions of Arabs throughout North Africa and the Middle East suddenly woke up, took to the streets, violently clashed with police and security forces, overthrew their governments and in one instance - Libya -managed to deliver their country to a perverse alliance of foreign terrorists, local thugs, CIA operatives and NATO bombers, eventually murdering their own exceptional leader, Muammar Gaddafi, live on global TV? BK: Yes, it is odd, but No, they weren't awaken by the CIA psy ops, and it ididn't start in early 2011- it began precisely on Dec. 17, 2010 when Mohamed Bouaziz set himself on fire in protest - over economic policies and local Tunisian police state brutality, and the violent suppression of the protests he started led to the overthrow of the dictator of Tunisia, and from there spread to Egypt, Libya, and it continues today in Bahrain, Yemen, Syria and other countries. It was because of the exceptional leader Muammar Gaddafi's violent crackdown on his own people that permitted his former NATO friends to bomb him. I have not seen any evidence of any CIA operatives involved on the ground, yet, but would like to if anyone could provide it. Mohamed Bouazizi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Question: just how spontaneous are these major social convulsions that lead torevolution, chaos, battles on streets and squares, thousands dead and injured,and the violent overthrow of entire governments? To a certain degree they are,no doubt, spontaneous: people are growing weary of their national governments'growing inability to resolve vital collective problems. BK: Bouazizi's act, and the protests that followed were certainly spontaneous, what was not was the violent suppression of the protests, which should be expected, even though it has been shown that it is the very suppression of the small numbers of original protesters that stimulate more people to join the revolt. In fact, a survey of public opinion in anycountry in the world will show that, on average, half the population rejectstheir on-going governments, and even their entire political classes. The morelucid and aware see them all as mere puppets subordinated to Money Power elitesin one form or another: whether banking cartels, oil and mining companies,media moguls, domestic and foreign lobbies, or a wide array of war-mongers.Because it's not just the streets of Cairo, Tripoli, Damascus or Benghazi thatare in turmoil, but also the streets of New York, London, Oakland, Madrid,Athens and Rome. BK:Yes, the success of the protests in Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and elsewhere has inspired young people to protest in Spain, USA and even Russia, but certainly the CIA and NATO did not instigate a regional Arab revolution in order to spark similar protests elsewhere. This destroys the original statement and argument that the CIA is behind the unrest. Uncannily, the standard image of social violence is the sameeverywhere: disgruntled, exasperated, impoverished protesters clashing withpolice and security forces: sad scenes of the poor fighting the poor... whilstone can imagine mega-bankers looking down from their 50th floor boardrooms,sipping their whisky and laughing at the scene down there... BK: The protesters in Egypt and USA are hardly impoverished, as they organized themselves over the internet, all have cell phones and while most are out of work, they are still middle-class with tents, sleeping bags and money. What is different, then, about today'soptimistic sounding "Arab Spring"? Basically, that ready-to-happencivil commotions and popular uprisings are purposely and maliciously beingtriggered by well-trained, well-financed, well-supported foreign and domesticagitators and agents, who have vested interests in destabilizing countries inthat region to promote their own agendas, totally unrelated to the NationalInterest of the locals. BK: Where are these well-trained, well-financed, well-supported foreign and domestic agitators and agents? I don't see any of them, or even one example of them. There were no foreign agitators in Tunisia, other than the French foreign minister who was on holiday with the dictator. The USA supported Gadhafi until he turned his military against his own people, not CIA agents. The CIA, USA and NATO had no motive to overthrow any of the dictators, who they were already in bed with and got all the oil they wanted. They have a very different axe to grind, aligned to theinterests of specific foreign powers - notably the US, UK, Israel, France, EUcountries and their regional pawns in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, Kuwait -where the Global Power Elite is embedded. In fact, this is a whole new form of wagingwar based on PsyWar (psychological warfare), where the mainstream global mediabecome veritable weapons of mass mental destruction of people's ability to seeand understand what is really being done to them. As with all wars, itsobjective is conquest and control of entire countries and regions. BK: In fact, the PsyWar that had previously been used in Guatemala, Cuba, Hungry, Poland, USSR, etc. was nowhere to be seen in Tunisa, Egypt or Libya, where the government was friendly with USA and NATO, and the conquest and control was already accomplished. This article and the following one, which implies that like the exceptional Gadhafi, the dictator of Syria still has the support of his people - and appears to be Russian dizinformation, as there has yet to be one example of CIA operational psy-war influence in any of these conflicts, and I am looking for them. Modern war is waged by powerful nations onfive different overlapping, holistic levels of aggression against weaker,appetizing countries, ranging from stark naked aggression to subtle subversion: 1. Military Invasion - Allows direct controlby fully overthrowing and overpowering the target nation. It has one majordrawback: it looks really bad on the evening news. Today, this applies to Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine; Libya is a moving target... BK: There was no military invasion of Libya, like the USA invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, the terrorists groups invaded Palestine, and the invading force occupies the country. It just didn't happen. 2. Military Coup - Identifies and supportsdomestic military/civilian allies and traitors willing to support a foreignpower against their own people. Latin America saw US-backed coupsin the 60's and 70's in Chile, Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia, Argentina... Now we seem to beseeing this in Egypt. BK: Military Coup is how Gadhafi assumed power in 1969. 3. Financial Coup - Banking cartels corner anygovernment they please to do "the Global Power Elite's bidding orelse..!" Examples: Argentina's 2001/2 collapse,preceded by Mexico (1997), Russia (1998), Brazil (1999). Today: Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Iceland... Instead of tanks,they use the IMF, World Bank, US Treasury, ECB... BK: The financial situation of Mohamid Bouazizi led to the original revolt in Tunisa, and the failure of the dictatorships to open their economy to the ordinary people led to their demise. 4. Political Coup - Flexibly uses combinationsof "crises" to impose unelected governments such as TrilateralistsMario Monti in Italy, and Lucas Papademosin Greece... 5. Social Coup - Today's PsyWar. First you mapout internal social grievances and woes, strife and ancestral hatreds, then youpin the fault on a suitable scapegoat/patsy, then you support and arm domesticand foreign agitators and "freedom fighters", ensuring that theWestern Media clearly tell the world who are the "good guys" and whothe "bad guys". BK: No, you can't map out and pin the fault on anybody but the leaders - the dictators, the person - I almost said people, but in each and every country it is ONE person - the dictator, who think they OWN the country and are addicted to the power they've held for years, in some cases, decades. And nobody needs to be told who the good guys and the bad guy are - the ones who control the police state and military and doing the killing are the bad guys. Today, the "Arab Spring". Tomorrow, maybewe'll see "Latin American Springs" or "South East AsianSprings..." or "Former Soviet Republics Springs..." BK: I think Africa spring, but it will take the African people themselves to get rid of all their dictators. Manycountries today fit one of these categories and/or a combination of several ofthem, escalating to/descending from one to another. Egypt began as a"Category 5" and escalated to a "Category 2". Libya also began as a"Category 5" and was bombed into a veritable "Category 1". Macro-management by the Global Power Elite isgoverned by their specific goals and interests in each country, because theystill need a strong US, a nuclear Israel and a stable Germany, but they definitelydo not want a strong Russia and China, a nuclear Iran and a stable Latin America... Like HurricaneWatches in the Caribbean, maybe we should start mapping out PoliticalRegime Change Watches on a regional, even global, basis. It would certainlyhelp in tracking the dark clouds of war, death and destruction that aregathering. Adrian Salbuchi is a political analyst, author, speaker and radio/TV commentator in Argentina.www.asalbuchi.com.ar BK: AND HERE WE HAVE MORE FROM OUR IRISH FRIEND GERRY O'COLMAIN - THE IRISH IDIOT WHO WENT LOOKING FOR THE "UNKNOWN SNIPERS" AND COULDN'T FIND THEM, OR FIGURE OUT THEY ARE TRAINED BY THE MILITARY AND SHOOT CIVILIANS IN EVERY COUNTRY WHERE WE HAVE SEEN THEM SO FAR. - By Gearóid Ó Colmáin http://poorrichards-...nd-western.html The people of Syriahave been beset by death squads and snipers since the outbreak of violencethere in March. BK: That much is true. Hundreds of Syrian soldiers and security personnel have beenmurdered, tortured and mutilated by Salafist and Muslim Brotherhood militants.Yet the international media corporations continue to spread the pathetic liethat the deaths are the result Bachar Al Assad's dictatorship. BK: There has been an average of two dozen civilians killed every day in Syria, and not by the Salafist or Muslim Brotherhood militants, but by the Syrian soldiers and security personnel - some of whom have defected to the Free Syrian Army and have begun to fight back. The Muslim Brotherhood, as in Egypt, refused to join the peaceful protests and demonstrations. When I visited Syriain April of this year, I personally encountered merchants and citizens in Hamawho told me they had seen armed terrorists roaming the streets of that oncepeaceful city, terrorizing the neighbourhood. I recall speaking to a fruitseller in the city of Hama whospoke about the horror he had witnessed that day. BK: Mohamid Bouazizi was a college educated fruit seller who wanted to sell his fruit but the police state refused to let him. As he described the scenes ofviolence to me, my attention was arrested by a newspaper headline in Englishfrom the Washington Post shown on Syrian television: "CIAbacks Syrian opposition". The Central Intelligence Agency provides training andfunding for groups who do the bidding of US imperialist interests. The historyof the CIA shows that backing oppositionforces means providing them with arms and finance, actions illegal underinternational law. BK: Thank God the CIA is on the right side for a change, and if the front page of the Washington Post is your primary source for information about Syria while you are in Syria, then you don't know what you are talking about - but we already knew that. A few days later, while at a hostel in the ancient, cultured city of Aleppo,I spoke to a Syrian business man and his family. The business man ran manyhotels in the city and was pro-Assad. He told me that he used to watch AlJazeera television but now had doubts about their honesty. As we conversed, theAl Jazeera television in the background showed scenes of Syrian soldiersbeating and torturing protestors. " Now if that is true, it is simplyunacceptable" he said. It is sometimes impossible to verify whether the imagesshown on television are true or not. Many of the crimes attributed to theSyrian army have been committed by the armed gangs, such as the dumping ofmutilated bodies into the river in Hama,presented to the world as more proof of the crimes of the Assad regime. BK: Al Jazerra is controlled by the dictator of Qatar, we know that, and its reporting is biased, we know that, but just because they show Syrian soldiers killing Syrian civilians doesn't mean that it was staged or didn't happen. We know it happens at least two dozen times a day, a daily crime stat that you can depend on. We don't depend on Al Jazerra to provide the proof of Assad's crimes, we know all too well of what he's done. There is a minority of innocent opponents of the Assad regime who believeeverything they see and hear on Al Jazeera and the other pro-Western satellitestations. These people simply do not understand the intricacies ofinternational politics. But the facts on the ground show that most people in Syriasupport the government. BK: Why doesn't he just have an election then? Well, subtracting two dozen people a day from the equasion and maybe someday Assad will once again have a majority. Syrians have access to all internet websites andinternational TV channels. They can watch BBC,CNN, Al Jazeera, read the New York Times online or Le Monde before tuning intotheir own state media. BK: And they have the CIA and Washington Post to tell them Assad is a killer dictator, what more do they need? In this respect, many Syrians are more informed aboutinternational politics than the average European or American. BK: Those who know any of the victims and martyrs of the revolution certainly are more knowledgeable than us. Most Europeansand American believe their own media. Few are capable of reading the Syrianpress in original Arabic or watching Syrian television. The Western powers arethe masters of discourse, who own the means of communication. The Arab Springhas been the most horrifying example of the wanton abuse of this power. BK: Wait a minute, I thought the new, social media, with Twitters, Facebook and Youtube cell phones were the primary means of communicating among the revolutionaries in every country, and it was liberating them from the confines of the mass media and international networks and allowing them to communicate one on one with each other and show the world what was happening unfiltered by the mainstream media? Disinformation is effective in sowing the seeds of doubt among those who areseduced by Western propaganda. BK: I for one haven't been seduced by western media, but by the courage, inspiration and intellect of the new, young revolutionaries who are overthrowing dictators in one country after another. Syrian state media has disproved hundreds of AlJazeera lies since the beginning of this conflict. BK: I thought we agreed not to trust Al Jazerra? Yet the western media hasrefused to even report the Syrian government's position lest fair coverage ofthe other side of this story encourage a modicum of critical thought in thepublic mind. BK: What do you mean the western media has refused to even report the Syrian government's position? I thought Assad was interviewed by Barbara Walters on international television the other day, and he said he doesn't control the military? Doesn't that count as encouraging a modicum of critical thought in the public mind? And I've left the comments section in because it reflects the reality of the situation: Anonymous said... Allow me to say that you are a piece of sh.... and a cheapshill you son of a whore. The only crimninals in the whole deal is the regimeof the mother xxxxer Bashar Asad you support. Like Gaddafi, whom you supportedwholeheartedly, you're supporting the criminal against humanity Asad and hiscriminal killers. There are no salafists, or islamists in Syriayou mother xxxxer. A bird can't fly in Syriawithout permission from the criminal government. Stop brain washing peoplemind. December 11, 2011 1:08 PM Anonymous said... YOU MUST BE FU....ING ISRAELI AGENT, YOU AREMOTHER FU...ER STUPID ASS. CAN'T YOU SEE WHATJEWS AND AMERICAN CIAARE DOING IN MIDDLE EAST FOR PAST 70 YEARS.YOU ARE DUMB ASS. December 11, 2011 2:12 PM Anonymous said... those who write pretending knowledge of Syriaare either ignorant or working for gangs like the one in Syria.if you check your data well and read the history of Hafiz Assad and his brotherRifaat you will, if you are really seeking the truth, know that Assad came todo a job in destroying Syria.he came in a military coup,1970, by 1975, he destroyed political life,education, economy, and the syrian social structure. he dismissed theconscientious high ranking officers in the syrian army, encouraged the sectarianaffiliation of his own sect in the army. only they could get promotions tohigher ranks.etc.. 1982 over 40.000 people were murdered in Hamasaying they were Muslim Brothers, which was a lie. when his son came to power,the constitution was changed in minutes to make it possible for him to bepresident, no elections, no law in syria, only the poor have to abide by thelaw, while those who are at the top of the pyramid can do anything, exempttheir sons from joining the army. they made education a farce by infiltratingthe end of year questions in higher education and secondary schools. the momentyou enter syriaas a syrian they make you feel like a criminal, of course only if you aresyrian. they are a gang looting and spreading corruption with impunity. whenthe Criminal Bashar Assad came to power people were optimistic. he lied to themsaying he would establish democracy and open the country and fight corruption.but what happened? since he came, the economy was looted by his family, andRami Makhloof his cousin is an example. he is not even forty years old, andsince 2001, his fortune is estimated to be over 35% of the syrian economy. heworked hard right? I could write and write but I can't finish telling you about the brutality ofthis regime, who turned the country into a gang land, humiliated theintellectuals, imprisoned those who still have integrity, killed his opponentsin European cities and at home. ask about Riad Alturk, 20 years in prison.Salah Albitar, who was assassinated in Paris.the killing in Lebanon,Iraq,and the palestinians. please Mr. knowledge, go and revise your data. if yousupport a gang join them, they will make you rich. Long live the syrian revolution. Long live Diraa, Homs, Hama.and allthe other syrian cities. yours from alSuweida. the town which is still to show its integrity andcourage. <a href="http://poorrichards-blog.blogspot.com/2011/12/syria-unknown-snipers-and-western.html?showComment=1323651148931#c807406882547900017" title="comment permalink">December 11, 2011 4:52 PM ======================================oooooooo LOGIC WOULD DICTATE THAT IF THE WEST WOULD MESS WITH RUSSIA,THEN STARTING THE "ARAB" SPRING WOULD BE VERY POSSIBLE FOR THE WEST. -----------------------------------------00000000------ Wall Street Propagandists Scramble To Cover US Ties to Russian Protesters December 11, 2011 link http://www.blacklistednews.com/Wall_Street_Propagandists_Scramble_To_Cover_US_Ties_to_Russian_Protesters/16949/0/38/38/Y/M.html also http://www.blacklistednews.com/Wall_Street_Vs._Russia/16932/0/38/38/Y/M.html oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Election-meddling fiasco hits US-Russia relations ------------------------------------------------ link http://rt.com/politics/russia-us-elections-clinton-putin-2012-usaid-427/ Revelations about email transactions between the US State Department and the Russian election watchdog Golos prior to Russia's parliamentary elections threaten to bring the reset to a grinding halt. Before a single vote was cast in the parliamentary elections, a string of incidents indicated that foreign governments were already exerting influence over the election process. Golos, an independent watchdog that has been monitoring elections in Russia for 10 years, was fined 30,000 rubles ($1,000) last week by a Moscow court for publishing “election-related opinion polls and research” after a deadline for publishing such material had passed (it is illegal in Russia to publish such information five days or less before an election). ===================================================================== ARAB SPRING ===================================================================== link http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27884 GLOBAL RESEARCH ONLINE INTERACTIVE READER No. 1 Libya and "The Arab Spring": Neoliberalism, "Regime Change" and NATO's "Humanitarian Wars" by Michel Chossudovsky, Finian Cunningham and Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya November 2011 INTRODUCTION First in Global Research's Interactive Reader Series, we bring to the attention of our readers a collection of Global Research articles on the "Arab Spring", covering recent developments in several countries across the Middle East and North Africa region. The Interactive Reader is a collection of previously published articles on Global Research. Its objective is to provide an overview as well as a comparative understanding of country-level experiences of the upheavals. This selection of articles is intended to dispel the notion that the "Arab Spring" is just a pro-democracy movement spreading spontaneously from country to country, opening the way to a meaningful change in the political and economic landscape. The term "Arab Spring" is itself a Western-imposed term conjured up by people who appear to have little understanding of the complexities and realities of the region. The double-standards of the U.S. and the European Union have become visible during the course of these tumultuous events. Both the US and the EU have kept silent about the brutal repression of unarmed civilian protesters in the Persian Gulf sheikhdoms, such as Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, while, by contrast, the Western powers have vehemently pushed for conflict with Libya and Syria. America is no "role model" of democratization for the Arab World, comprising some 22 countries with a combined population of 300 million. US military presence imposed on Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, and other Arab countries over decades, coupled with Washington-inspired "free market" reforms, are the root cause of state violence. Washington's agenda for Egypt and Tunisia was to hijack the protest movement; what prevails in Egypt is the maintenance of a de facto military regime. In Tunisia, following the October 2011 parliamentary elections, the neoliberal policy framework remains unscathed. From Washington's standpoint, regime replacement no longer requires the installation of authoritarian military rulers, as in the heyday of US imperialism. Regime change can be implemented by co-opting political parties, financing civil society groups, infiltrating the protest movement, and by manipulating national elections. The ultimate objective is to sustain the interests of foreign powers and to uphold the "Washington consensus" of the IMF/World Bank economic agenda that has served to impoverish millions throughout the Arab World and beyond. Moreover, Western powers have used "Political Islam" --including the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda-affiliated groups-- to pursue their hegemonic objectives. Covert operations are launched to weaken the secular state, foment sectarian violence and create social divisions throughout the Arab World. In Libya, the "pro-democracy" rebels were led by Al Qaeda affiliated paramilitary brigades under the supervision of NATO Special Forces. The much-vaunted "Liberation" of Tripoli was carried out by former members of the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). Destabilization of sovereign states through "regime change" is closely coordinated with military planning. War preparations to attack Syria and Iran have been in an advanced state of readiness for several years. The road to Tehran goes through Damascus. A US/NATO-sponsored war on Iran would involve, as a first step, a destabilization campaign ("regime change") including covert intelligence operations in support of rebel forces directed against the Syrian government. A "humanitarian war" under the logo of "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P), as seen in Libya, is on the Western powers' agenda for Syria. Such a venture would also contribute to the ongoing destabilization of Lebanon. Were a military campaign to be waged against Syria, Israel would be directly or indirectly involved in military and intelligence operations. The hitherto covert role of Saudi Arabia and Turkey in destabilizing Syria would also emerge as open aggression towards long-time regional rival Iran. A war on Syria could quite possibly ignite a conflagration across the entire Middle East and North Africa, with repercussions on a global scale: Iran's historic allies, Russia and China, will be pitted against the US and NATO powers; and religious schisms across the region could vent into an explosion of internecine conflicts; also proxy wars currently being waged in East Africa by Western powers could escalate with untold human suffering in an already famine-hit region. War plans directed against Syria are coordinated with those pertaining to Iran. Iran's alleged nuclear weapons programme is the pretext and the justification. Tehran is also identified as a "State sponsor of terrorism", for allegedly supporting the Al Qaeda network. In recent developments, what is unfolding is an integrated attack plan on Iran led by the US, with the participation of the United Kingdom and Israel. The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the World simultaneously. Militarization at the global level is instrumented through the US military's Unified Command structure: the entire planet is divided up into geographic Combatant Commands under the control of the Pentagon. The Pentagon’s global military design is one of world conquest. According to (former) NATO Commander General Wesley Clark, the Pentagon’s military road-map consists of a sequence of war theaters : “[The] five-year campaign plan [includes]... a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.” What this collection of essays demonstrates is that Western intervention in this pivotal world region is far from the benign rhetoric frequently spouted in Washington, London, Paris and Berlin, espousing universal human rights and democratic freedoms. Rather, we are witnessing a neo-imperialist intervention that is self-serving, expedient and ultimately setting the world on a path of incalculable destruction. PART I TUNISIA: DICTATORSHIP AND NEOLIBERALISM Dictatorship and Neo-Liberalism: The Tunisian People's Uprising - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - 2011-01-19 Tunisia is not free yet. The structure that kept Bin Ali in place still exists. The U.S. and France have still not forfeited their economic interests in Tunisia either. Tunisia and the IMF's Diktats: How Macro-Economic Policy Triggers Worldwide Poverty and Unemployment - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-01-20 Against a background of rising food prices, the IMF recommends the removal of subsidies... PART II THE POPULAR UPRISING IN EGYPT: "REVOLUTION" AND "COUNTER-REVOLUTION" The Protest Movement in Egypt: "Dictators" do not Dictate, They Obey Orders - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-01-29 "Dictators" do not dictate, they obey orders. President Hosni Mubarak was a faithful servant of Western economic interests. The Popular Uprising in Egypt: The Military Machine Remains Intact, The Political Status Quo Prevails - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - 2011-02-21 The same group of Egyptian generals running Cairo presently also formed the backbone of the Mubarak regime. There has been no real change in government. The military junta represents a continuation of the Mubarak regime. Dictators are "Disposable": The Rise and Fall of America's Military Henchmen - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-02-18 When dictators are no longer needed, they are replaced. The military machine prevails, combined with a ruthless form of capitalist development... PART III BAHRAIN: THE FORGOTTEN "ARAB SPRING" Bahrain: The Social Roots of Revolt Against Another US Ally - by Finian Cunningham - 2011-02-18 The Bahraini authorities deployed helicopters and tanks, with army and police firing teargas and live rounds. Among the protesters were hundreds of women and children. Slaughter in Bahrain - by Finian Cunningham There is little doubt that the regime received clearance from political allies in Washington, London and the other Gulf states to step up its four-week old repression against the civilian population. Detained Bahraini Medics: Brutal Crackdown against Pro-Democracy Movement - by Finian Cunningham - 2011-04-21 The families of medics unlawfully detained in Bahrain have accused the Royal College of Surgeons Ireland (RCSI) of putting financial investment interests above human rights. Bahraini Rulers Play Sectarian Card in Bid to Trump Pro-democracy Movement - by Finian Cunningham Increasing attacks on Shia mosques in the Bahraini state's withering crackdown against the pro-democracy movement is a deliberate attempt to isolate the political opposition and amounts to a campaign of "sectarian cleansing", PART IV LIBYA: NATO'S "HUMANITARIAN WAR" Libya and the Big Lie: Using Human Rights Organizations to Launch Wars - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - 2011-09-29 The war against Libya is built on fraud. The UN Security Council passed two resolutions against Libya on the basis of unproven claims that Qaddafi was killing his own people in Benghazi... When War Games Go Live: "Staging" a "Humanitarian War" against "SOUTHLAND" - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-04-16 We were led to believe that the protest movement in Egypt and Tunisia had spread to Libya, but the war on Libya was planned months prior to the Arab protest movement... "Our Man in Tripoli": US-NATO Sponsored Islamic Terrorists Integrate Libya's Pro-Democracy Opposition - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-04-03 Concepts are turned upside down: The US-NATO military alliance is supporting a rebellion integrated by Islamic terrorists, in the name of the "War on Terrorism"... "Operation Libya" and the Battle for Oil: Redrawing the Map of Africa - by Prof Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-03-09 Libya is among the world's largest oil economies with approximately 3.5% of global oil reserves, more than twice those of the US. The "Liberation" of Libya: NATO Special Forces and Al Qaeda Join Hands - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-08-28 The jihadists and NATO work hand in glove. These "former" Al Qaeda affiliated brigades constitute the backbone of the "pro-democracy" rebellion. Destroying a Country's Standard of Living: What Libya Had Achieved, What has been Destroyed - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-09-20 A historical reversal in Libya economic and social development has occurred. An entire country has been destroyed, its people driven into abysmal poverty. PART V YEMEN: REPUBLICAN DICTATORSHIP AT THE CROSSROADS Yemen and The Militarization of Strategic Waterways - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2010-02-07 The militarization of the Indian Ocean is a process of securing US control over Socotra Island and the Gulf of Aden. PART VI SYRIA: NATO'S NEXT WAR SYRIA: Who is Behind The Protest Movement? Fabricating a Pretext for a US-NATO "Humanitarian Intervention" - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-05-03 The ultimate purpose is to spark sectarian violence and political chaos within Syria by covertly supporting Islamic terrorist organizations. The Pentagon's "Salvador Option": The Deployment of Death Squads in Iraq and Syria - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-08-16 Recent developments in Syria point to a full-fledged armed insurgency, integrated by Islamist "freedom fighters" covertly supported, trained and equipped by foreign powers. The Al Qaeda Insurgency in Syria: Recruiting Jihadists to Wage NATO's "Humanitarian Wars" - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-09-02 The objective of this armed insurrection is to trigger the response of the police and armed forces, with a view to justifying a "humanitarian" military intervention by NATO PART VII MILITARY ESCALATION AND THE BROADER WAR A "Humanitarian War" on Syria? Military Escalation. Towards a Broader Middle East-Central Asian War? - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-08-09 The road to Tehran goes through Damascus. A US-NATO war on Iran would involve, as a first step, a destabilization campaign ("regime change") directed against Syria. America's Conquest of Africa: The Roles of France and Israel - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Julien Teil. Introduction by Cynthia McKinney - 2011-10-06 Terrorists not only fight for Washington on the ground, they also act as frontmen for regime change through so-called human rights organizations that promote democracy. The Powers of Manipulation: Islam as a Geopolitical Tool to Control the Middle East - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - 2011-07-02 As Washington and its cohorts march towards the Eurasian Heartland, they have tried to manipulate Islam as a geo-political tool. They have created political and social chaos in the process. America's War in the Horn of Africa: "Drone Alley", A Harbinger of Western Power across the African Continent - by Finian Cunningham - 2011-10-29 The US Military confirms Washington's secret new war in Somalia despite official denials. Israel and Libya: Preparing Africa for the "Clash of Civilizations" - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya. Introduction by Cynthia McKinney - 2011-10-11 An attempt to separate the merging point of an Arab and African identity is underway... Global Warfare: Targeting Iran: Preparing for World War III - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-11-03 The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the World simultaneously. What is unfolding is an integrated attack plan on Iran led by the US, with the participation of the UK and Israel -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- About the Authors Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (Emeritus) at the University of Ottawa. He is the Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal and Editor of the globalresearch.ca website. He is the author of The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003) and America's "War on Terrorism"(2005). His most recent book is entitled Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War (2011). He has taught as Visiting Professor at universities in Western Europe, South East Asia and Latin America, acted as an adviser to governments of developing countries and as a consultant for the several international organizations. Prof. Chossudovsky is a signatory of the Kuala Lumpur declaration to criminalize war and recipient of the Human Rights Prize of the Society for the Protection of Civil Rights and Human Dignity (GBM), Berlin, Germany. He is also a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. His writings have been published in more than twenty languages. Finian Cunningham is currently Global Research's Middle East and East Africa Correspondent. He has written extensively on international affairs. Previously, he was based in Bahrain and witnessed the upheavals in the Persian Gulf kingdom during 2011 as well as the subsequent Saudi-led brutal crackdown against pro-democracy protests. He is now based in East Africa. Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a Sociologist and an award-winning author based in Ottawa. He is a Research Associate at the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal. He was a witness to the "Arab Spring" in action in North Africa. While on the ground in Libya during the NATO bombing campaign, he reported out of Tripoli for several Western media. He was Special Correspondent for Global Research and Pacifica's investigative radio program Flashpoints, broadcast out of Berkeley, California. His writings have been published in more than ten languages. =========================================== Edited December 12, 2011 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 I don't know why I waste my time setting you straight Steve, but I keep looking for the evidence that the Arab Spring uprisings were sparked by the CIA or NATO Psy-Ops, and have yet to be given one example or any evidence, so why keep posting headlines that aren't supported by what is under them? - BK Revolutionary Program "Arab Spring": Spontaneous Popular Uprising orUS-NATO Sponsored Psy Op? by Adrian Salbuchi http://globalresearc...xt=va&aid=27839 "Arab Springs" are not as spontaneous as theWestern mainstream media would have us believe. Their behind-the-scenes instigators always get "a little help from their Global Power Elite mega-planningfriends..." BK: Salbuchi, please supply one example of a "behind the scenes instigator" in the Arab spring - other than al Jazerra. Thanks. Isn't it rather odd that after long decades of slumber, starting in early 2011 millions upon millions of Arabs throughout North Africa and the Middle East suddenly woke up, took to the streets, violently clashed with police and security forces, overthrew their governments and in one instance - Libya -managed to deliver their country to a perverse alliance of foreign terrorists, local thugs, CIA operatives and NATO bombers, eventually murdering their own exceptional leader, Muammar Gaddafi, live on global TV? BK: Yes, it is odd, but No, they weren't awaken by the CIA psy ops, and it ididn't start in early 2011- it began precisely on Dec. 17, 2010 when Mohamed Bouaziz set himself on fire in protest - over economic policies and local Tunisian police state brutality, and the violent suppression of the protests he started led to the overthrow of the dictator of Tunisia, and from there spread to Egypt, Libya, and it continues today in Bahrain, Yemen, Syria and other countries. It was because of the exceptional leader Muammar Gaddafi's violent crackdown on his own people that permitted his former NATO friends to bomb him. I have not seen any evidence of any CIA operatives involved on the ground, yet, but would like to if anyone could provide it. Mohamed Bouazizi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Question: just how spontaneous are these major social convulsions that lead torevolution, chaos, battles on streets and squares, thousands dead and injured,and the violent overthrow of entire governments? To a certain degree they are,no doubt, spontaneous: people are growing weary of their national governments'growing inability to resolve vital collective problems. BK: Bouazizi's act, and the protests that followed were certainly spontaneous, what was not was the violent suppression of the protests, which should be expected, even though it has been shown that it is the very suppression of the small numbers of original protesters that stimulate more people to join the revolt. In fact, a survey of public opinion in anycountry in the world will show that, on average, half the population rejectstheir on-going governments, and even their entire political classes. The morelucid and aware see them all as mere puppets subordinated to Money Power elitesin one form or another: whether banking cartels, oil and mining companies,media moguls, domestic and foreign lobbies, or a wide array of war-mongers.Because it's not just the streets of Cairo, Tripoli, Damascus or Benghazi thatare in turmoil, but also the streets of New York, London, Oakland, Madrid,Athens and Rome. BK:Yes, the success of the protests in Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and elsewhere has inspired young people to protest in Spain, USA and even Russia, but certainly the CIA and NATO did not instigate a regional Arab revolution in order to spark similar protests elsewhere. This destroys the original statement and argument that the CIA is behind the unrest. Uncannily, the standard image of social violence is the sameeverywhere: disgruntled, exasperated, impoverished protesters clashing withpolice and security forces: sad scenes of the poor fighting the poor... whilstone can imagine mega-bankers looking down from their 50th floor boardrooms,sipping their whisky and laughing at the scene down there... BK: The protesters in Egypt and USA are hardly impoverished, as they organized themselves over the internet, all have cell phones and while most are out of work, they are still middle-class with tents, sleeping bags and money. What is different, then, about today'soptimistic sounding "Arab Spring"? Basically, that ready-to-happencivil commotions and popular uprisings are purposely and maliciously beingtriggered by well-trained, well-financed, well-supported foreign and domesticagitators and agents, who have vested interests in destabilizing countries inthat region to promote their own agendas, totally unrelated to the NationalInterest of the locals. BK: Where are these well-trained, well-financed, well-supported foreign and domestic agitators and agents? I don't see any of them, or even one example of them. There were no foreign agitators in Tunisia, other than the French foreign minister who was on holiday with the dictator. The USA supported Gadhafi until he turned his military against his own people, not CIA agents. The CIA, USA and NATO had no motive to overthrow any of the dictators, who they were already in bed with and got all the oil they wanted. They have a very different axe to grind, aligned to theinterests of specific foreign powers - notably the US, UK, Israel, France, EUcountries and their regional pawns in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, Kuwait -where the Global Power Elite is embedded. In fact, this is a whole new form of wagingwar based on PsyWar (psychological warfare), where the mainstream global mediabecome veritable weapons of mass mental destruction of people's ability to seeand understand what is really being done to them. As with all wars, itsobjective is conquest and control of entire countries and regions. BK: In fact, the PsyWar that had previously been used in Guatemala, Cuba, Hungry, Poland, USSR, etc. was nowhere to be seen in Tunisa, Egypt or Libya, where the government was friendly with USA and NATO, and the conquest and control was already accomplished. This article and the following one, which implies that like the exceptional Gadhafi, the dictator of Syria still has the support of his people - and appears to be Russian dizinformation, as there has yet to be one example of CIA operational psy-war influence in any of these conflicts, and I am looking for them. Modern war is waged by powerful nations onfive different overlapping, holistic levels of aggression against weaker,appetizing countries, ranging from stark naked aggression to subtle subversion: 1. Military Invasion - Allows direct controlby fully overthrowing and overpowering the target nation. It has one majordrawback: it looks really bad on the evening news. Today, this applies to Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine; Libya is a moving target... BK: There was no military invasion of Libya, like the USA invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, the terrorists groups invaded Palestine, and the invading force occupies the country. It just didn't happen. 2. Military Coup - Identifies and supportsdomestic military/civilian allies and traitors willing to support a foreignpower against their own people. Latin America saw US-backed coupsin the 60's and 70's in Chile, Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia, Argentina... Now we seem to beseeing this in Egypt. BK: Military Coup is how Gadhafi assumed power in 1969. 3. Financial Coup - Banking cartels corner anygovernment they please to do "the Global Power Elite's bidding orelse..!" Examples: Argentina's 2001/2 collapse,preceded by Mexico (1997), Russia (1998), Brazil (1999). Today: Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Iceland... Instead of tanks,they use the IMF, World Bank, US Treasury, ECB... BK: The financial situation of Mohamid Bouazizi led to the original revolt in Tunisa, and the failure of the dictatorships to open their economy to the ordinary people led to their demise. 4. Political Coup - Flexibly uses combinationsof "crises" to impose unelected governments such as TrilateralistsMario Monti in Italy, and Lucas Papademosin Greece... 5. Social Coup - Today's PsyWar. First you mapout internal social grievances and woes, strife and ancestral hatreds, then youpin the fault on a suitable scapegoat/patsy, then you support and arm domesticand foreign agitators and "freedom fighters", ensuring that theWestern Media clearly tell the world who are the "good guys" and whothe "bad guys". BK: No, you can't map out and pin the fault on anybody but the leaders - the dictators, the person - I almost said people, but in each and every country it is ONE person - the dictator, who think they OWN the country and are addicted to the power they've held for years, in some cases, decades. And nobody needs to be told who the good guys and the bad guy are - the ones who control the police state and military and doing the killing are the bad guys. Today, the "Arab Spring". Tomorrow, maybewe'll see "Latin American Springs" or "South East AsianSprings..." or "Former Soviet Republics Springs..." BK: I think Africa spring, but it will take the African people themselves to get rid of all their dictators. Manycountries today fit one of these categories and/or a combination of several ofthem, escalating to/descending from one to another. Egypt began as a"Category 5" and escalated to a "Category 2". Libya also began as a"Category 5" and was bombed into a veritable "Category 1". Macro-management by the Global Power Elite isgoverned by their specific goals and interests in each country, because theystill need a strong US, a nuclear Israel and a stable Germany, but they definitelydo not want a strong Russia and China, a nuclear Iran and a stable Latin America... Like HurricaneWatches in the Caribbean, maybe we should start mapping out PoliticalRegime Change Watches on a regional, even global, basis. It would certainlyhelp in tracking the dark clouds of war, death and destruction that aregathering. Adrian Salbuchi is a political analyst, author, speaker and radio/TV commentator in Argentina.www.asalbuchi.com.ar BK: AND HERE WE HAVE MORE FROM OUR IRISH FRIEND GERRY O'COLMAIN - THE IRISH IDIOT WHO WENT LOOKING FOR THE "UNKNOWN SNIPERS" AND COULDN'T FIND THEM, OR FIGURE OUT THEY ARE TRAINED BY THE MILITARY AND SHOOT CIVILIANS IN EVERY COUNTRY WHERE WE HAVE SEEN THEM SO FAR. - By Gearóid Ó Colmáin http://poorrichards-...nd-western.html The people of Syriahave been beset by death squads and snipers since the outbreak of violencethere in March. BK: That much is true. Hundreds of Syrian soldiers and security personnel have beenmurdered, tortured and mutilated by Salafist and Muslim Brotherhood militants.Yet the international media corporations continue to spread the pathetic liethat the deaths are the result Bachar Al Assad's dictatorship. BK: There has been an average of two dozen civilians killed every day in Syria, and not by the Salafist or Muslim Brotherhood militants, but by the Syrian soldiers and security personnel - some of whom have defected to the Free Syrian Army and have begun to fight back. The Muslim Brotherhood, as in Egypt, refused to join the peaceful protests and demonstrations. When I visited Syriain April of this year, I personally encountered merchants and citizens in Hamawho told me they had seen armed terrorists roaming the streets of that oncepeaceful city, terrorizing the neighbourhood. I recall speaking to a fruitseller in the city of Hama whospoke about the horror he had witnessed that day. BK: Mohamid Bouazizi was a college educated fruit seller who wanted to sell his fruit but the police state refused to let him. As he described the scenes ofviolence to me, my attention was arrested by a newspaper headline in Englishfrom the Washington Post shown on Syrian television: "CIAbacks Syrian opposition". The Central Intelligence Agency provides training andfunding for groups who do the bidding of US imperialist interests. The historyof the CIA shows that backing oppositionforces means providing them with arms and finance, actions illegal underinternational law. BK: Thank God the CIA is on the right side for a change, and if the front page of the Washington Post is your primary source for information about Syria while you are in Syria, then you don't know what you are talking about - but we already knew that. A few days later, while at a hostel in the ancient, cultured city of Aleppo,I spoke to a Syrian business man and his family. The business man ran manyhotels in the city and was pro-Assad. He told me that he used to watch AlJazeera television but now had doubts about their honesty. As we conversed, theAl Jazeera television in the background showed scenes of Syrian soldiersbeating and torturing protestors. " Now if that is true, it is simplyunacceptable" he said. It is sometimes impossible to verify whether the imagesshown on television are true or not. Many of the crimes attributed to theSyrian army have been committed by the armed gangs, such as the dumping ofmutilated bodies into the river in Hama,presented to the world as more proof of the crimes of the Assad regime. BK: Al Jazerra is controlled by the dictator of Qatar, we know that, and its reporting is biased, we know that, but just because they show Syrian soldiers killing Syrian civilians doesn't mean that it was staged or didn't happen. We know it happens at least two dozen times a day, a daily crime stat that you can depend on. We don't depend on Al Jazerra to provide the proof of Assad's crimes, we know all too well of what he's done. There is a minority of innocent opponents of the Assad regime who believeeverything they see and hear on Al Jazeera and the other pro-Western satellitestations. These people simply do not understand the intricacies ofinternational politics. But the facts on the ground show that most people in Syriasupport the government. BK: Why doesn't he just have an election then? Well, subtracting two dozen people a day from the equasion and maybe someday Assad will once again have a majority. Syrians have access to all internet websites andinternational TV channels. They can watch BBC,CNN, Al Jazeera, read the New York Times online or Le Monde before tuning intotheir own state media. BK: And they have the CIA and Washington Post to tell them Assad is a killer dictator, what more do they need? In this respect, many Syrians are more informed aboutinternational politics than the average European or American. BK: Those who know any of the victims and martyrs of the revolution certainly are more knowledgeable than us. Most Europeansand American believe their own media. Few are capable of reading the Syrianpress in original Arabic or watching Syrian television. The Western powers arethe masters of discourse, who own the means of communication. The Arab Springhas been the most horrifying example of the wanton abuse of this power. BK: Wait a minute, I thought the new, social media, with Twitters, Facebook and Youtube cell phones were the primary means of communicating among the revolutionaries in every country, and it was liberating them from the confines of the mass media and international networks and allowing them to communicate one on one with each other and show the world what was happening unfiltered by the mainstream media? Disinformation is effective in sowing the seeds of doubt among those who areseduced by Western propaganda. BK: I for one haven't been seduced by western media, but by the courage, inspiration and intellect of the new, young revolutionaries who are overthrowing dictators in one country after another. Syrian state media has disproved hundreds of AlJazeera lies since the beginning of this conflict. BK: I thought we agreed not to trust Al Jazerra? Yet the western media hasrefused to even report the Syrian government's position lest fair coverage ofthe other side of this story encourage a modicum of critical thought in thepublic mind. BK: What do you mean the western media has refused to even report the Syrian government's position? I thought Assad was interviewed by Barbara Walters on international television the other day, and he said he doesn't control the military? Doesn't that count as encouraging a modicum of critical thought in the public mind? And I've left the comments section in because it reflects the reality of the situation: Anonymous said... Allow me to say that you are a piece of sh.... and a cheapshill you son of a whore. The only crimninals in the whole deal is the regimeof the mother xxxxer Bashar Asad you support. Like Gaddafi, whom you supportedwholeheartedly, you're supporting the criminal against humanity Asad and hiscriminal killers. There are no salafists, or islamists in Syriayou mother xxxxer. A bird can't fly in Syriawithout permission from the criminal government. Stop brain washing peoplemind. December 11, 2011 1:08 PM Anonymous said... YOU MUST BE FU....ING ISRAELI AGENT, YOU AREMOTHER FU...ER STUPID ASS. CAN'T YOU SEE WHATJEWS AND AMERICAN CIAARE DOING IN MIDDLE EAST FOR PAST 70 YEARS.YOU ARE DUMB ASS. December 11, 2011 2:12 PM Anonymous said... those who write pretending knowledge of Syriaare either ignorant or working for gangs like the one in Syria.if you check your data well and read the history of Hafiz Assad and his brotherRifaat you will, if you are really seeking the truth, know that Assad came todo a job in destroying Syria.he came in a military coup,1970, by 1975, he destroyed political life,education, economy, and the syrian social structure. he dismissed theconscientious high ranking officers in the syrian army, encouraged the sectarianaffiliation of his own sect in the army. only they could get promotions tohigher ranks.etc.. 1982 over 40.000 people were murdered in Hamasaying they were Muslim Brothers, which was a lie. when his son came to power,the constitution was changed in minutes to make it possible for him to bepresident, no elections, no law in syria, only the poor have to abide by thelaw, while those who are at the top of the pyramid can do anything, exempttheir sons from joining the army. they made education a farce by infiltratingthe end of year questions in higher education and secondary schools. the momentyou enter syriaas a syrian they make you feel like a criminal, of course only if you aresyrian. they are a gang looting and spreading corruption with impunity. whenthe Criminal Bashar Assad came to power people were optimistic. he lied to themsaying he would establish democracy and open the country and fight corruption.but what happened? since he came, the economy was looted by his family, andRami Makhloof his cousin is an example. he is not even forty years old, andsince 2001, his fortune is estimated to be over 35% of the syrian economy. heworked hard right? I could write and write but I can't finish telling you about the brutality ofthis regime, who turned the country into a gang land, humiliated theintellectuals, imprisoned those who still have integrity, killed his opponentsin European cities and at home. ask about Riad Alturk, 20 years in prison.Salah Albitar, who was assassinated in Paris.the killing in Lebanon,Iraq,and the palestinians. please Mr. knowledge, go and revise your data. if yousupport a gang join them, they will make you rich. Long live the syrian revolution. Long live Diraa, Homs, Hama.and allthe other syrian cities. yours from alSuweida. the town which is still to show its integrity andcourage. <a href="http://poorrichards-blog.blogspot.com/2011/12/syria-unknown-snipers-and-western.html?showComment=1323651148931#c807406882547900017" title="comment permalink">December 11, 2011 4:52 PM ======================================oooooooo LOGIC WOULD DICTATE THAT IF THE WEST WOULD MESS WITH RUSSIA,THEN STARTING THE "ARAB" SPRING WOULD BE VERY POSSIBLE FOR THE WEST. BK: Logic dictates that anyone who looks at the world as a battle between EAST and WEST is a false view of the world as it works. The USSR is gone and the USA has no beef with Russia. -----------------------------------------00000000------ Wall Street Propagandists Scramble To Cover US Ties to Russian Protesters December 11, 2011 link http://www.blacklist.../38/38/Y/M.html also http://www.blacklist.../38/38/Y/M.html oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Election-meddling fiasco hits US-Russia relations ------------------------------------------------ link http://rt.com/politi...2012-usaid-427/ Revelations about email transactions between the US State Department and the Russian election watchdog Golos prior to Russia's parliamentary elections threaten to bring the reset to a grinding halt. Before a single vote was cast in the parliamentary elections, a string of incidents indicated that foreign governments were already exerting influence over the election process. BK: Before a single vote was cast it was apparent to the Russian people that the elections were rigged, and not rigged by foreign governments but by insiders, and they held the largest protest ever held since the fall of the USSR. It isn't foreign influence that matters, it is internal corruption. Golos, an independent watchdog that has been monitoring elections in Russia for 10 years, was fined 30,000 rubles ($1,000) last week by a Moscow court for publishing “election-related opinion polls and research” after a deadline for publishing such material had passed (it is illegal in Russia to publish such information five days or less before an election). ===================================================================== ARAB SPRING ===================================================================== link http://globalresearc...xt=va&aid=27884 GLOBAL RESEARCH ONLINE INTERACTIVE READER No. 1 BK: If there's any interaction in this Global Research I'd like to correct the mistakes they are propagating, especially about the origin of the regional Arab revolt and the situation in Libya. I've read all these articles Steven, and they're wrong - wrong about USA CIA instigation of the revolt and the NATO involvement. NATO was led by a fellow Canadian - like Chossudovsky - how come he keeps saying CIA, when it was a Canadian general who led NATO and USA took a back seat. He should concentrate on Canada's role in the "West" and recognize they were right in what they did. All this junk is nothing but clap trap promoting a bankrupt ideology that is obsolete. Instead of reading this stuff and then trying to pawn it off on me and the rest of the forum readership, why don't you think for yourself and post what you believe? BK Revolutionary Program Libya and "The Arab Spring": Neoliberalism, "Regime Change" and NATO's "Humanitarian Wars" by Michel Chossudovsky, Finian Cunningham and Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya November 2011 INTRODUCTION First in Global Research's Interactive Reader Series, we bring to the attention of our readers a collection of Global Research articles on the "Arab Spring", covering recent developments in several countries across the Middle East and North Africa region. The Interactive Reader is a collection of previously published articles on Global Research. Its objective is to provide an overview as well as a comparative understanding of country-level experiences of the upheavals. This selection of articles is intended to dispel the notion that the "Arab Spring" is just a pro-democracy movement spreading spontaneously from country to country, opening the way to a meaningful change in the political and economic landscape. The term "Arab Spring" is itself a Western-imposed term conjured up by people who appear to have little understanding of the complexities and realities of the region. The double-standards of the U.S. and the European Union have become visible during the course of these tumultuous events. Both the US and the EU have kept silent about the brutal repression of unarmed civilian protesters in the Persian Gulf sheikhdoms, such as Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, while, by contrast, the Western powers have vehemently pushed for conflict with Libya and Syria. America is no "role model" of democratization for the Arab World, comprising some 22 countries with a combined population of 300 million. US military presence imposed on Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, and other Arab countries over decades, coupled with Washington-inspired "free market" reforms, are the root cause of state violence. Washington's agenda for Egypt and Tunisia was to hijack the protest movement; what prevails in Egypt is the maintenance of a de facto military regime. In Tunisia, following the October 2011 parliamentary elections, the neoliberal policy framework remains unscathed. From Washington's standpoint, regime replacement no longer requires the installation of authoritarian military rulers, as in the heyday of US imperialism. Regime change can be implemented by co-opting political parties, financing civil society groups, infiltrating the protest movement, and by manipulating national elections. The ultimate objective is to sustain the interests of foreign powers and to uphold the "Washington consensus" of the IMF/World Bank economic agenda that has served to impoverish millions throughout the Arab World and beyond. Moreover, Western powers have used "Political Islam" --including the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda-affiliated groups-- to pursue their hegemonic objectives. Covert operations are launched to weaken the secular state, foment sectarian violence and create social divisions throughout the Arab World. In Libya, the "pro-democracy" rebels were led by Al Qaeda affiliated paramilitary brigades under the supervision of NATO Special Forces. The much-vaunted "Liberation" of Tripoli was carried out by former members of the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). Destabilization of sovereign states through "regime change" is closely coordinated with military planning. War preparations to attack Syria and Iran have been in an advanced state of readiness for several years. The road to Tehran goes through Damascus. A US/NATO-sponsored war on Iran would involve, as a first step, a destabilization campaign ("regime change") including covert intelligence operations in support of rebel forces directed against the Syrian government. A "humanitarian war" under the logo of "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P), as seen in Libya, is on the Western powers' agenda for Syria. Such a venture would also contribute to the ongoing destabilization of Lebanon. Were a military campaign to be waged against Syria, Israel would be directly or indirectly involved in military and intelligence operations. The hitherto covert role of Saudi Arabia and Turkey in destabilizing Syria would also emerge as open aggression towards long-time regional rival Iran. A war on Syria could quite possibly ignite a conflagration across the entire Middle East and North Africa, with repercussions on a global scale: Iran's historic allies, Russia and China, will be pitted against the US and NATO powers; and religious schisms across the region could vent into an explosion of internecine conflicts; also proxy wars currently being waged in East Africa by Western powers could escalate with untold human suffering in an already famine-hit region. War plans directed against Syria are coordinated with those pertaining to Iran. Iran's alleged nuclear weapons programme is the pretext and the justification. Tehran is also identified as a "State sponsor of terrorism", for allegedly supporting the Al Qaeda network. In recent developments, what is unfolding is an integrated attack plan on Iran led by the US, with the participation of the United Kingdom and Israel. The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the World simultaneously. Militarization at the global level is instrumented through the US military's Unified Command structure: the entire planet is divided up into geographic Combatant Commands under the control of the Pentagon. The Pentagon’s global military design is one of world conquest. According to (former) NATO Commander General Wesley Clark, the Pentagon’s military road-map consists of a sequence of war theaters : “[The] five-year campaign plan [includes]... a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.” What this collection of essays demonstrates is that Western intervention in this pivotal world region is far from the benign rhetoric frequently spouted in Washington, London, Paris and Berlin, espousing universal human rights and democratic freedoms. Rather, we are witnessing a neo-imperialist intervention that is self-serving, expedient and ultimately setting the world on a path of incalculable destruction. PART I TUNISIA: DICTATORSHIP AND NEOLIBERALISM Dictatorship and Neo-Liberalism: The Tunisian People's Uprising - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - 2011-01-19 Tunisia is not free yet. The structure that kept Bin Ali in place still exists. The U.S. and France have still not forfeited their economic interests in Tunisia either. Tunisia and the IMF's Diktats: How Macro-Economic Policy Triggers Worldwide Poverty and Unemployment - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-01-20 Against a background of rising food prices, the IMF recommends the removal of subsidies... PART II THE POPULAR UPRISING IN EGYPT: "REVOLUTION" AND "COUNTER-REVOLUTION" The Protest Movement in Egypt: "Dictators" do not Dictate, They Obey Orders - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-01-29 "Dictators" do not dictate, they obey orders. President Hosni Mubarak was a faithful servant of Western economic interests. The Popular Uprising in Egypt: The Military Machine Remains Intact, The Political Status Quo Prevails - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - 2011-02-21 The same group of Egyptian generals running Cairo presently also formed the backbone of the Mubarak regime. There has been no real change in government. The military junta represents a continuation of the Mubarak regime. Dictators are "Disposable": The Rise and Fall of America's Military Henchmen - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-02-18 When dictators are no longer needed, they are replaced. The military machine prevails, combined with a ruthless form of capitalist development... PART III BAHRAIN: THE FORGOTTEN "ARAB SPRING" Bahrain: The Social Roots of Revolt Against Another US Ally - by Finian Cunningham - 2011-02-18 The Bahraini authorities deployed helicopters and tanks, with army and police firing teargas and live rounds. Among the protesters were hundreds of women and children. Slaughter in Bahrain - by Finian Cunningham There is little doubt that the regime received clearance from political allies in Washington, London and the other Gulf states to step up its four-week old repression against the civilian population. Detained Bahraini Medics: Brutal Crackdown against Pro-Democracy Movement - by Finian Cunningham - 2011-04-21 The families of medics unlawfully detained in Bahrain have accused the Royal College of Surgeons Ireland (RCSI) of putting financial investment interests above human rights. Bahraini Rulers Play Sectarian Card in Bid to Trump Pro-democracy Movement - by Finian Cunningham Increasing attacks on Shia mosques in the Bahraini state's withering crackdown against the pro-democracy movement is a deliberate attempt to isolate the political opposition and amounts to a campaign of "sectarian cleansing", PART IV LIBYA: NATO'S "HUMANITARIAN WAR" Libya and the Big Lie: Using Human Rights Organizations to Launch Wars - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - 2011-09-29 The war against Libya is built on fraud. The UN Security Council passed two resolutions against Libya on the basis of unproven claims that Qaddafi was killing his own people in Benghazi... When War Games Go Live: "Staging" a "Humanitarian War" against "SOUTHLAND" - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-04-16 We were led to believe that the protest movement in Egypt and Tunisia had spread to Libya, but the war on Libya was planned months prior to the Arab protest movement... "Our Man in Tripoli": US-NATO Sponsored Islamic Terrorists Integrate Libya's Pro-Democracy Opposition - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-04-03 Concepts are turned upside down: The US-NATO military alliance is supporting a rebellion integrated by Islamic terrorists, in the name of the "War on Terrorism"... "Operation Libya" and the Battle for Oil: Redrawing the Map of Africa - by Prof Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-03-09 Libya is among the world's largest oil economies with approximately 3.5% of global oil reserves, more than twice those of the US. The "Liberation" of Libya: NATO Special Forces and Al Qaeda Join Hands - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-08-28 The jihadists and NATO work hand in glove. These "former" Al Qaeda affiliated brigades constitute the backbone of the "pro-democracy" rebellion. Destroying a Country's Standard of Living: What Libya Had Achieved, What has been Destroyed - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-09-20 A historical reversal in Libya economic and social development has occurred. An entire country has been destroyed, its people driven into abysmal poverty. PART V YEMEN: REPUBLICAN DICTATORSHIP AT THE CROSSROADS Yemen and The Militarization of Strategic Waterways - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2010-02-07 The militarization of the Indian Ocean is a process of securing US control over Socotra Island and the Gulf of Aden. PART VI SYRIA: NATO'S NEXT WAR SYRIA: Who is Behind The Protest Movement? Fabricating a Pretext for a US-NATO "Humanitarian Intervention" - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-05-03 The ultimate purpose is to spark sectarian violence and political chaos within Syria by covertly supporting Islamic terrorist organizations. The Pentagon's "Salvador Option": The Deployment of Death Squads in Iraq and Syria - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-08-16 Recent developments in Syria point to a full-fledged armed insurgency, integrated by Islamist "freedom fighters" covertly supported, trained and equipped by foreign powers. The Al Qaeda Insurgency in Syria: Recruiting Jihadists to Wage NATO's "Humanitarian Wars" - by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-09-02 The objective of this armed insurrection is to trigger the response of the police and armed forces, with a view to justifying a "humanitarian" military intervention by NATO PART VII MILITARY ESCALATION AND THE BROADER WAR A "Humanitarian War" on Syria? Military Escalation. Towards a Broader Middle East-Central Asian War? - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-08-09 The road to Tehran goes through Damascus. A US-NATO war on Iran would involve, as a first step, a destabilization campaign ("regime change") directed against Syria. America's Conquest of Africa: The Roles of France and Israel - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Julien Teil. Introduction by Cynthia McKinney - 2011-10-06 Terrorists not only fight for Washington on the ground, they also act as frontmen for regime change through so-called human rights organizations that promote democracy. The Powers of Manipulation: Islam as a Geopolitical Tool to Control the Middle East - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - 2011-07-02 As Washington and its cohorts march towards the Eurasian Heartland, they have tried to manipulate Islam as a geo-political tool. They have created political and social chaos in the process. America's War in the Horn of Africa: "Drone Alley", A Harbinger of Western Power across the African Continent - by Finian Cunningham - 2011-10-29 The US Military confirms Washington's secret new war in Somalia despite official denials. Israel and Libya: Preparing Africa for the "Clash of Civilizations" - by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya. Introduction by Cynthia McKinney - 2011-10-11 An attempt to separate the merging point of an Arab and African identity is underway... Global Warfare: Targeting Iran: Preparing for World War III - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2011-11-03 The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the World simultaneously. What is unfolding is an integrated attack plan on Iran led by the US, with the participation of the UK and Israel -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- About the Authors Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (Emeritus) at the University of Ottawa. He is the Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal and Editor of the globalresearch.ca website. He is the author of The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003) and America's "War on Terrorism"(2005). His most recent book is entitled Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War (2011). He has taught as Visiting Professor at universities in Western Europe, South East Asia and Latin America, acted as an adviser to governments of developing countries and as a consultant for the several international organizations. Prof. Chossudovsky is a signatory of the Kuala Lumpur declaration to criminalize war and recipient of the Human Rights Prize of the Society for the Protection of Civil Rights and Human Dignity (GBM), Berlin, Germany. He is also a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. His writings have been published in more than twenty languages. Finian Cunningham is currently Global Research's Middle East and East Africa Correspondent. He has written extensively on international affairs. Previously, he was based in Bahrain and witnessed the upheavals in the Persian Gulf kingdom during 2011 as well as the subsequent Saudi-led brutal crackdown against pro-democracy protests. He is now based in East Africa. Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a Sociologist and an award-winning author based in Ottawa. He is a Research Associate at the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal. He was a witness to the "Arab Spring" in action in North Africa. While on the ground in Libya during the NATO bombing campaign, he reported out of Tripoli for several Western media. He was Special Correspondent for Global Research and Pacifica's investigative radio program Flashpoints, broadcast out of Berkeley, California. His writings have been published in more than ten languages. =========================================== Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now