ElBaradei's Decade of Scolding Mubarak Belies Image of Distant Bureaucrat … Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel laureate threatening to overturn Egypt's political order, was privately urging President Hosni Mubarak (left) to open up his government for at least nine years before escalating demands last week for the leader's resignation. ElBaradei's diplomacy with Mubarak began in the months leading up to the 2003 Iraq war, when he stepped out of his role as chief of the United Nations atomic agency to have "candid talks in Cairo about the importance of starting democratic reform in Egypt," said Laban Coblentz, ElBaradei's former speech writer in an interview yesterday. The contacts show that ElBaradei, criticized by some in the opposition for being remote from politics at home, was pushing for changes in how the country was run for years. – Bloomberg
Dominant Social Theme: ElBaradei is a man of destiny amidst a time of noble turmoil.
Free-Market Analysis: We want to make it very clear that in this article we are not making light of the many sacrifices the courageous people of the Middle East for freedom. Now that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has indicated he will not again run for office, the protests have generated political change, and those who participated in the demonstrations ought to feel proud. Whether Mubarak can hang on until September and upcoming elections is an open question.
In this article we will continue to examine what has become increasingly evident since the Daily Bell broached it several weeks ago: These Middle Eastern uprisings are not entirely spontaneous but are in a sense orchestrated by Western powers that be for a variety or reasons. Even the proximate causes – rising food prices and a lack of employment – can be seen as deliberate Western policies designed to create hopelessness and despair that can then be converted to civil unrest at the opportune moment. Fortunately, the truth-telling of the Internet has helped people wake up from the overwhelming mind-control of the 20th century. We think the same process is occurring in the Middle East.
It is true, one can make the argument that the demonstrations in Egypt and elsewhere were spontaneous, the result of Internet access, which is a new phenomenon (a point the Bell has made for two years). And it is true as well, that the looting and lack of security in Egypt may have damped the protests for the moment, but the underlying issue remains: Western powers are surely abetting these color revolutions for a variety of reasons.
Yes, elite manipulations yet continue, in our view. And thus to a degree at least the "color revolutions" constitute a shadow-play, even a Dreamtime; participants acting on their own may not know they are being manipulated. Certainly they will not learn of it from the mainstream media which is covering these events in a purely linear fashion, ignoring evidences of manipulation and promoting the uprisings merely as expressions of grievances that must be addressed by new regimes.
In the past, we've written of Dreamtime within the context of Western 20th century democracies. The Baby Boom generation in Europe and America grew up with a series of certainties. Many of these are crumbling now. Western democracies CANNOT provide a lifetime of security from cradle to grave. Regulation cannot tame market abuses – only competition can. Nonetheless, these are the solutions that are being proposed once again as an antidote to Middle Eastern and African turmoil.
That the West is TRYING to set the agenda in the Middle East is almost beyond doubt at this point. Already there have been reports that Western (American) intel operations helped train Egyptian "youth" to overthrow the current government. Yesterday came word that the US government had met with the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood about Egyptian instability as well. The meetings were reported by World Net Daily, as follows:
U.S. 'held secret meeting with Muslim Brotherhood' … Discussed fall of Egypt with group dedicated to Islam's global spread … The Egyptian government has information a diplomat at the U.S. embassy in Cairo secretly met yesterday with a senior leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, the nation's major Islamist opposition group, WND has learned. The topic of the meeting was the future of Egypt following the "fall" of President Hosni Mubarak, an Egyptian intelligence official told WND. The claim comes amid charges from Cairo that the Obama administration has been encouraging the protests rocking Egypt and targeting the rule of Mubarak, a key U.S. ally in the Middle East … The Egyptian intelligence official speaking to WND said the meeting took place inside the American embassy in Cairo.
Why would the West be seeking a series of regime changes in Africa and the Middle East? Western powers-that-be seek this evolution as a means of achieving – eventual – closer global governance. Both unity governments and Islamic ones offer a dialectic that allows the elite to move the entire Middle East in the direction it chooses. We've commented on this in various articles. You can see some of them here:
In order to achieve its goals, the elite needs to install controllable "leaders." It is, for instance, very obvious that the Anglo-American elite wants Nobel Peace Prize winner Mohamed ElBaradei to lead the Egypt's new unity government whenever Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak finally steps down. Yet from our point of view ElBaradei is likely to do exactly the opposite of what the mainstream media intimates he will do.
Instead of expanding Egyptian democracy, he may attempt to reinvigorate elite lynchpin mechanisms such as the Egyptian central bank, societal militarization, authoritarian governance and graduated taxing authority. He will do nothing to reinforce freedom, in fact, and everything to buttress the West's continued dominance over Egypt and over the Middle East generally.
The West's orchestration is truly remarkable. The UK Telegraph recently carried an article written from a WikiLeaks leaked diplomatic cable describing how the US (and the Anglosphere generally) had been deliberately orchestrating a build-up anti-Mubarak feeling in Egypt for at least two years and maybe longer. US intel was evidently educating the "youth" of Egypt (Egypt being a young country demographically) on how to carry out a successful revolt.
Such manipulations have helped give rise to a swelling chorus of cynicism regarding these rolling revolutions. Predictably, much of it is coming from the ‘Net. The Bloomberg article (excerpted above) is an obvious promotional piece for Mohamed ElBaradei, who is "connected" on numerous levels. Feedbacker Cavatell sent us the following remarks by independent hard-money analyst Franklin Sanders regarding the current color revolutions:
A reader wrote asking me why I didn't mention the upheaval in Egypt as a cause of gold's rise on Friday. Mainly because I don't put much stock in so-called "safe haven" moves … Speaking of Egypt, do any of you mushrooms besides me entertain a tee-tiny doubt about the "spontaneity" of the uprising in Egypt? Does anybody with even a tenth of a brain left believe that a big, mean government that has held power 29 years by jailing & otherwise silencing its opponents can be overthrown by a bunch of hollering nerds on Twitter or Tweeter or Tweety-Bird or whatever it's called? Now think about that. Yes, yes, the Spirit Of Democracy rises up against the Tyrant, arm in arm in solidarity with the Easter Bunny & Tweety Bird. Hmmmm.
Friends, I am just a natural born durn fool from Tennessee, but even I suspect a set-up, more so when Bernard O'Bama & Handsome Hillary mumble about democracy, which looks so much like throwing Mubarak out of the rowboat that I can't tell the difference. Just to show that even a blind hog finds an acorn now & then, the execrable Franklin Roosevelt said, "Nothing happens by accident in politics. If it happened, somebody made it happen.""
Again, we want to reemphasize that those doing the protesting in Egypt are brave souls, committed to their beliefs. But it is obvious there is more going on than spontaneous uprisings. The Anglosphere's fine hand is everywhere one looks. The intention is to shape these revolutions as previous regimes were shaped, to reinforce the messaging and the direction in which the Anglosphere wants the world to travel.
And yet, as the 21st century deepens, the task becomes harder and the Western's elite's grasp more tenuous. The Internet itself has upset the plans of the elite. Ambitious operations such as this one may be – an apparent destabilization of strong men throughout the Middle East – must occur in secrecy, otherwise those who are being manipulated will not prove malleable. This is why the elite tended to operate in secrecy throughout the 20th century. But in the 21st century, secrecy has been stripped away from the Anglosphere's intel operations. They are commented on even as they are happening, or seeming to happen.
Picture the elite's surge toward world governance as a business model – the largest and richest business in the world. The corporation has no name and no outright branding, but it palpably exists. Promotions are its hallmark. Fear is its strategy of choice. Once strategies are put into play they are extremely hard to halt. Even when one goes awry, like global warming, the machine grinds forward because there are simply too many moving pieces.
This is why the memes of the elite lurch toward their final destination like zombies. Lurching, toppling over, they advance nonetheless, even if the larger populace disagrees vehemently with them. In this case, "color revolutions" are the dominant social theme of choice. Already the Internet has gone a long way to debunk them as manipulations; over time we would have to believe the average Middle-Eastern participant might come to be aware of the full spectrum of the apparent psyops. In fact, we would argue they already are.
This Islamic model exists today and is supported by many within the Middle East. The West, needing an enemy, has labored mightily to create fundamental Islam – out of Saudi Arabia – to provide an alternative to moderate Islam. The choice, as a manipulative power-elite sees it, is to be between Westernized Islam and fundamentalism. ElBaradei represents the one pole and outfits like the Muslim Brotherhood are supposed to represent the other.
But thanks to the increasingly free-flow of information, Western elites are losing control of the narrative both in the West and the Middle East. Efforts to Westernize the stiff-necked Afghan Pashtun tribe is increasingly a failure. Pakistan's Punjabi elite families are going their own way as well. Let us see if the outcome for the Western power elite is any better in the Middle East. If these apparent latter gambits fail, elite hopes for world governance will be increasingly set back. The elite itself may have to take a step back.
There is of course, always the prospect of war. Well-known futurist Gerald Celente is already speculating that the unrest in the Middle East shall support and encourage "austerity" violence in Europe. Meanwhile, there are neo-Conservative voices in America calling for pre-emptive war with Iran to forestall Islamic fundamentalism generally. This is all predictable, of course, and part of the reason to destabilize the Middle East from a Western-elite point of view. Chaos of all kinds, even a potential war against Islam inevitably leads to the "solution" of world government.
And yet … even wars are hard to come by in a nuclear era where even a few bombs can virtually end civilization not only in the Middle East but also the West. We tend to doubt a formal war will be joined. What WILL continue is an evident and obvious destabilizing of the Middle East. As we have argued before, however, such strategies are increasingly dubious in an era where they can be predicted and the Deus ex machina is analyzed in advance by a hundred thousand blogs. What is known is not secret. What is not secret can be addressed, rebutted and generally nullified.
Protests continue in Egypt and it seems obvious now that the army is increasingly in charge, not Mubarak; though that is not likely a stable social construct either. Even if Mubarak does somehow manage to hang on, Egypt will never be the country it was before the demonstrations. And Western elites, evidently willing to encourage social chaos, including potential economic chaos (oil and gold price spikes, etc.), may now begin to regret what has been done. Too late. Things will not revert in our view, nor, perhaps, are people in the Internet era as controllable as they were in the 20th century. In fact, it would be ironic indeed if the Anglosphere's antagonists – Islam and the Muslim world in general – led the way to a freer 21st century not only for the Middle East but for the Western world as well.