The UK Daily Telegraph recently posted an article entitled, "How can we remain silent while Christians are being persecuted?" Anybody reading the Daily Bell this past year will not be surprised by this headline, nor the article itself. Turns out that the writer is reporting on "a new evil [that] is sweeping the Middle East" – and that evil is violence against Christians.
"How can we remain silent while Christians are being persecuted?" the article asks. "The Americans have gone now, and Iraq's Christian communities – some of the world's oldest – are undergoing an exodus on a biblical scale."
The article does not only mention Iraq and makes it clear that the anti-Christian sentiment is broad-based: "The attacks, which peak at Christmas, have already spread to Egypt, where Coptic Christians have seen their churches firebombed by Islamic fundamentalists …
"In Tunisia, priests are being murdered. Maronite Christians in Lebanon have, for the first time, become targets of bombing campaigns. Christians in Syria, who have suffered as much as anyone from the Assad regime, now pray for its survival. If it falls, and the Islamists triumph, persecution may begin in earnest."
Early in January 2011, we predicted this. In an article entitled, "Western Elites Still Secretly Building Islam," we wrote about the West's strategic undermining of non-religious or Christian regimes in the Ivory Coast, Tunisia and Egypt. Here's an excerpt:
Is the war on terror a success? The Anglo-American elite needs an enemy if the authoritarianism that is rising in the West is to continue – because despotism (and globalism) is more easily created when there is an outside enemy. But fighting against 100 Al Qaeda soldiers in Afghanistan is not anybody's idea of a substantive threat. And the Taliban are evidently and obviously fighting an occupying force.
What if the powers-that-be had decided to do what they could to expand the Muslim threat – and thus expand (in the Western mind anyway) the specter of resurgent, militant Islam? A cynical idea isn't it, dear reader. It is merely speculation, but there are reasons to explore it further …
We are proposing a new stage in the manipulated war on terror. Having built up the Middle East through enormous cash infusions, the Anglosphere is continually expanding the role of fundamental Islam and may even be prepared to overthrow old and trusted allies to do so. The war on terror so far has not proven very terrible (except to Afghan and Iraqi citizens) but if the Jasmine revolution "spreads" throughout the Middle East, resurgent, fundamentalist Islam may indeed become a reality.
Right on time comes this article in the UK Telegraph, almost exactly a year later, demanding that the British foreign office do more to help victims of Arab prejudice. It's an amazing article only because it is so predictable and (surprise) neglects to provide a frame of reference that would explain the rising violence.
Why would the article neglect a frame of reference? Because the Anglosphere power elite that wants to create world government, needs to continually manufacture enemies – to create fear. We call this fear-mongering the production of "dominant social themes."
The idea is to frighten Western middle classes into surrendering wealth and power to a variety of globalist institutions that the power elite has built and put into place – and is now expanding on. These include the UN, IMF, World Bank, ICC, BIS, etc.
One of the biggest memes the power elite employs is war. Through war, all sorts of authoritarianism can be enhanced and the globalist agenda expanded efficiently in ways that it never could be otherwise. But in order to have war, one must create an enemy. And at this task Western elites are most efficient. Here's some more from the article:
These dividing lines are now being made into battle lines by hardline Salafists, who are emerging as victors of the Arab Spring. They belong to the same mutant strain of Sunni Islam which inspired al-Qaeda. Their agenda is sectarian warfare, and they loathe Shia Islam as much as they do Christians and Jews. Their enemy lies not over a border, but in a church, synagogue or Shia mosque.
The Salafists may be detested by the Muslim mainstream. But as they are finding out, you don't need to be popular to seize power in a post-dictatorship Arab world – you just need to be the best organised. The West is so obsessed with government structure that it doesn't notice when power lies elsewhere, and Islamist death squads are executing barbers and unveiled women in places like Basra.
Two years ago, the idea of such bloody sectarianism would have sounded like a macabre fantasy in a country as civilised as Egypt. After al-Qaeda bombed a church on New Year's Day, Muslim elders sat in the front pews forming a human shield and defying the terrorists.
But moderate Egyptians are now losing this power struggle. The killing has started, with another 25 Copts murdered in October. Tens of thousands of Egypt's Christians have already joined their Iraqi counterparts in exile: as Iraq proved, one death can lead to a thousand emigrations. The Salafists are finding it staggeringly easy to realise their fantasy of a "purer" Egypt.
Without explaining the triggering principles of Western intelligence manipulation of Islamic cultures, the article attributes the violence to the nascent Arab Spring. Of course, as is well known in alternative media circles, the Arab Spring itself is an incipient Western invention.
The US State Department and apparently the CIA, through various facilities such as AYM, have sponsored a far-flung youth movement of rebellious young men and women who have been trained to use various tools, including social media, to cause unrest in their home countries. Apparently, these same tactics have been used to create Occupy Wall Street unrest.
"The Arab Spring was always going to mean danger for religious minorities, unleashing the Islamic extremists who previously were kept at bay," the article informs us. We also learn that religious persecution was not a hallmark of previous (overthrown) regimes. "For all their evil, the old secular tyrants abused their victims equally, whether they wore the cross, hijab or skullcap."
The article damns the British foreign office as being "typically slow to recognise the gathering threat, despite repeated warnings." Of course, the obvious reason for this slowness is that the unrest in the Middle East is being deliberately provoked by MI6 – along with counterparts in DC and Tel Aviv.
You won't read such speculation in this article, however. The rationale pro-offered is psychological rather than strategic: "It might be that the Foreign Office sees this as part of a soppy equalities agenda, unworthy of diplomatic attention. Those who have raised the issue directly with William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, say he is unenthusiastic."
Predictably, the psychological speculation is buttressed by that old rationale: ignorance. "The Foreign Office did not realise the full evil of ethnic cleansing in the Balkans until it was too late: it did not take civil tensions seriously enough. It can do better now, making clear that it regards religious cleansing as an emerging evil that ought to be confronted wherever it is being incubated."
Really? It's funny how much Western foreign policy is larded with ignorance and stupidity. The Anglosphere, for all of its abilities to win wars and dominate the world, is constantly making elemental mistakes: the Treaty of Versailles, Yalta, the emergence of Communist China, etc.
Now as we watch militant Islam emerge from the shadows, we are informed yet again that Western powers-that-be are being caught unawares. "Outright religious oppression is quietly ignored, from Saudi Arabia to the Maldives."
Well, of course it is! Hey, stay tuned. More to come!