AL JAZEERA REVOLUTIONS PREDICTED IN 2003

Brown Bomber

In this video from 2003 this guy Sheikh N Stevens or whatever his name is predicts the current events in Middle East. This is a must watch imo. If you have a short attention span skip to about 2:20.

joebucks

Brown Bomber wrote: »

In this video from 2003 this guy Sheikh N Stevens or whatever his name is predicts the current events in Middle East. This is a must watch imo. If you have a short attention span skip to about 2:20.

Cheers for putting this up BB. Thought-provoking video. Is there a part two to this speech? Does he suggest the ultimate goal of this possible war will be the ushering in of a one world government?

nyarlothothep

The only real prediction he makes is that there will be uprisings in the Arab world, anyone could have predicted that with knowledge in world history and revolutionary theory. Also he's on somewhat safe ground in saying that any replacement government/regime is going to bear a grudge against Israel, or even just take an anti Israeli stance.

Brown Bomber

joebucks wrote: »

Cheers for putting this up BB. Thought-provoking video.

Glad you liked it Joe.

joebucks wrote: »

Is there a part two to this speech?

Overall I think it is about an hours long lecture. Problem is that it's been uploaded onto youtube by different users who cut off each part at different points. Maybe you might have better luck figuring it out. The lecture is called 9/11 and what the future holds for Muslims

joebucks wrote: »

Does he suggest the ultimate goal of this possible war will be the ushering in of a one world government?

Yeah. In part 1 below. The ending of the UN, 1 currency, 1 culture and 1 government.

From around the 3:50 mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tv16WrqRtaU

I think this is next part roughly to the original video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JLZc-3BPQs

From 5:30 he predicts the current global economic mess we're in. A wise man.

Monty Burnz

nyarlothothep wrote: »

The only real prediction he makes is that there will be uprisings in the Arab world, anyone could have predicted that with knowledge in world history and revolutionary theory. Also he's on somewhat safe ground in saying that any replacement government/regime is going to bear a grudge against Israel, or even just take an anti Israeli stance.

I also believe that George W Bush was predicting revolutions in the Middle East. He's a freemason, probably.

Brown Bomber

nyarlothothep wrote: »

The only real prediction he makes is that there will be uprisings in the Arab world, anyone could have predicted that with knowledge in world history and revolutionary theory.

He also predicted the influence of Al Jazeera in these revolutions, he predicted "more and more (Israeli) atrocities" which has happened at a rapid pace since he spoke in 2003.

The destruction of Lebanon in 2006.


The destruction of Gaza in 2008/09. Attacking defenseless civilians in international waters, extra-judicial killings, expansion of illegal settlements, ethnic cleansing of the Beduoin in the Negev and so much more.

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Also he's on somewhat safe ground in saying that any replacement government/regime is going to bear a grudge against Israel, or even just take an anti Israeli stance.

I understood him differently. The grudge is not automatic but as a result of acts barbarism and cruelty with the intent of inflaming the Arab/Moslem world to provoke a response so Israel can act in self-defense to declare an expansionist war across the whole region.

The Economist on the 29th of Dec 2010:
"2011 might see the most destructive such war (in the Middle East) for many years"
http://www.economist.com/node/17800151

I'd add that 9-11 and the (potential) framing of Arabs could be part of this masterplan to essentially murder Muslims and colonise Muslim states in the name of self-defense.

Brown Bomber

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I also believe that George W Bush was predicting revolutions in the Middle East. He's a freemason, probably.

sarcasm?

Monty Burnz

Brown Bomber wrote: »

sarcasm?

Why would you say that? Are you saying that Bush did not predict revolutions in the ME? Are you claiming he is definitely not a freemason?

nyarlothothep

Brown Bomber wrote: »

He also predicted the influence of Al Jazeera in these revolutions, he predicted "more and more (Israeli) atrocities" which has happened at a rapid pace since he spoke in 2003.

The destruction of Lebanon in 2006.


The destruction of Gaza in 2008/09. Attacking defenseless civilians in international waters, extra-judicial killings, expansion of illegal settlements, ethnic cleansing of the Beduoin in the Negev and so much more.



I understood him differently. The grudge is not automatic but as a result of acts barbarism and cruelty with the intent of inflaming the Arab/Moslem world to provoke a response so Israel can act in self-defense to declare an expansionist war across the whole region.

The Economist on the 29th of Dec 2010:
"2011 might see the most destructive such war (in the Middle East) for many years"
http://www.economist.com/node/17800151

I'd add that 9-11 and the (potential) framing of Arabs could be part of this masterplan to essentially murder Muslims and colonise Muslim states in the name of self-defense.

hmmm, none of those predictions imply a special knowledge, it can be deducible from in depth analysis. Their economy is 17th in the world, pretty good but by no means indicative of becoming a super power. Also I don't see Israel becoming the world super power, I don't even think the Israelis have any desire to be a super power, they're obsessed with actualizing the myth of the Israeli nation minus the Palestinians and neighbouring anti semetic Arab states.

Also I don't think he's a wise man, I take it he means modern Islam is a version of Islamic belief that doesn't involve oppression of women, forceful indoctrination of people to believe in an ancient cult leader etc.

uprising2

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Why would you say that? Are you saying that Bush did not predict revolutions in the ME? Are you claiming he is definitely not a freemason?

He's a member of skull and bones an offshoot of masonry.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPh7sUvhZ3E

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull_and_Bones

Christie's drops human skull from auction
Yale University's secret Order of Skull and Bones used the skull and crossbones as a ballot box.
Earlier this month, the World Archaeological Congress condemned the sale, calling the sale of human body parts an "affront to human dignity."
Historians disagreed on whether the society had ever dug up Geronimo's grave.
The collegiate society has existed since 1832 and has prominent alumni such as former President George W. Bush and his grandfather, Sen. Prescott Bush.
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-01-22/us/new.york.skull.auction_1_human-skull-skull-and-bones-geronimo?_s=PM:US

joebucks

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Glad you liked it Joe.


Overall I think it is about an hours long lecture. Problem is that it's been uploaded onto youtube by different users who cut off each part at different points. Maybe you might have better luck figuring it out. The lecture is called 9/11 and what the future holds for Muslims




Yeah. In part 1 below. The ending of the UN, 1 currency, 1 culture and 1 government.

From around the 3:50 mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tv16WrqRtaU

I think this is next part roughly to the original video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JLZc-3BPQs

From 5:30 he predicts the current global economic mess we're in. A wise man.

Nice one man. What's interesting for me is that this cleric is reaching the same conclusion (that a great war will bestarted and the only viable solution to ending that war will be introducing One World Government) as other 'Conspiracy theorists' and even Christian leaders who talk about NWO/illuminatti/luciferians/whatever ye wanna call it. Now the question is, are all of these people reaching the same conclusion independently or are they all feeding off the same information. IE has this cleric just gotten his info from watching Bill Cooper just say, or has his own independent research lead him to these conclusions..

Brown Bomber

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Why would you say that?

Because I can't for the life of me understand what relevance your point has to this topic.

I simply asked you was it sarcasm. You failed to answer.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Are you saying that Bush did not predict revolutions in the ME? Are you claiming he is definitely not a freemason?

:rolleyes: Why are you asking me these stupid questions?
This was my complete post:

sarcasm?

Brown Bomber

joebucks wrote: »

Nice one man. What's interesting for me is that this cleric is reaching the same conclusion (that a great war will bestarted and the only viable solution to ending that war will be introducing One World Government) as other 'Conspiracy theorists' and even Christian leaders who talk about NWO/illuminatti/luciferians/whatever ye wanna call it. Now the question is, are all of these people reaching the same conclusion independently or are they all feeding off the same information. IE has this cleric just gotten his info from watching Bill Cooper just say, or has his own independent research lead him to these conclusions..

An interesting question. I have no idea to be honest. I would imagine his influences would be Islamic, but there probably is an Islamic world Bill Cooper. His theories and predicitions, and I am basing this solely on the video above seem to be a combination of his own geopolitical observations and Islamic mysticism connected to end times prophesy. But I really don't know.

He's highly educated and a prolific author of high regard apparently.

" He studied Islam, Philosophy and International Relations at several universities and institutions of higher learning. Among them are al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, the Institute of International Relations of the University of the West Indies in Trinidad, the University of Karachi in Pakistan, the Aleemiyah Institute of Islamic Studies in Karachi, Pakistan, and the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, Switzerland."

uprising2

Brown Bomber wrote: »

:rolleyes: Why are you asking me these stupid questions?

Is it ever any other way?........don't answer.

Bomber, your posts are intelligent, informative and interesting, you will always have some w****r coming out with pure BS to disrupt the thread, probably yanking the little man off himself as he does it, it's what some get their thrills from, also known as one line warriors, because they climax after a few words.

Brown Bomber

nyarlothothep wrote: »

hmmm, none of those predictions imply a special knowledge,

Could you define "special knowledge" for me? Are you talking in terms of supernatural ability?

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Their economy is 17th in the world, pretty good but by no means indicative of becoming a super power. Also I don't see Israel becoming the world super power, I don't even think the Israelis have any desire to be a super power, they're obsessed with actualizing the myth of the Israeli nation minus the Palestinians and neighbouring anti semetic Arab states.

I don't understand why you consider the Jewish state and Israel as the regional superpower as mutually exclusive.

Perhaps this might explain my position http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/articles/article0005345.html

A Strategy For Israel In The Nineteen Eighties was published in the 80's by the World Zionist Organisation and translated by Israeli Professor Israel Shahak.

I've taken a selection of quotes from the paper to save you reading it:

A sad and very stormy situation surrounds Israel and creates challenges for it, problems, risks but also far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967. Chances are that opportunities missed at that time will become achievable in the Eighties to an extent and along dimensions which we cannot even imagine today.

Today, we suddenly face immense opportunities for transforming the situation thoroughly and this we must do in the coming decade, otherwise we shall not survive as a state.

(Regaining) the Sinai peninsula (Egyptian Territory) with its present and potential resources is therefore a political priority which is obstructed by the Camp David and the peace agreements... The Egyptians will not need to keep the peace treaty after the return of the Sinai, and they will do all they can to return to the fold of the Arab world and to the USSR in order to gain support and military assistance. American aid is guaranteed only for a short while, for the terms of the peace and the weakening of the U.S. both at home and abroad will bring about a reduction in aid. Without oil and the income from it, with the present enormous expenditure, we will not be able to get through 1982 under the present conditions and we will have to act in order to return the situation to the status quo which existed in Sinai prior to Sadat's visit and the mistaken peace agreement signed with him in March 1979

Israel has two major routes through which to realize this purpose, one direct and the other indirect... What is left therefore, is the indirect option. The economic situation in Egypt, the nature of the regime and its pan-Arab policy, will bring about a situation after April 1982 in which Israel will be forced to act directly or indirectly in order to regain control over Sinai as a strategic, economic and energy reserve for the long run. Egypt does not constitute a military strategic problem due to its internal conflicts and it could be driven back to the post 1967 war situation in no more than one day

Egypt, in its present domestic political picture, is already a corpse, all the more so if we take into account the growing Moslem-Christian rift. Breaking Egypt down territorially into distinct geographical regions is the political aim of Israel in the Nineteen Eighties on its Western front.

If Egypt falls apart, countries like Libya, Sudan or even the more distant states will not continue to exist in their present form and will join the downfall and dissolution of Egypt.

The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unqiue areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel's primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target.

Lebanon's total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precendent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the Arabian peninsula and is already following that track. The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unqiue areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel's primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shi'ite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northern Jordan. This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our reach today.

Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel's targets.

Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. An Iraqi-Iranian war will tear Iraq apart and cause its downfall at home even before it is able to organize a struggle on a wide front against us. Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi'ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization

Sorry for all the red it's just that there are so many important points here IMO.

Yitzhak Rabin

Uprising banned for personal abuse.

MontyBurnz, try stick to the topic.

Monty Burnz

Apologies, I was just making a point that I made on the thread about the (attempted) revolution in Egypt - that part of the NeoCon doctrine was that establishing democracy in Iraq would lead to popular uprisings and the democratisation of the wider Arab world. Bush was predicting this in speeches a few years back. As I don't see an obvious connection between what has happened in Iraq and the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt and to a lesser extent Yemen, I made the point that it would be quite ironic if the revolutions they were looking for were only a few years down the road anyway without the attendant loss of life that came with the war.

But from a CT perspective, the fact remains not only the guy in the OP's video was making these predictions - the ultimate insider GW Bush and his NeoCon buddies were confidently predicting revolutions years back when they invaded Iraq.

Yitzhak Rabin

I've deleted the OT comments. Use your PM boxes for that stuff.

Everyone post on topic, or don't post

joebucks

Brown Bomber wrote: »

An interesting question. I have no idea to be honest. I would imagine his influences would be Islamic, but there probably is an Islamic world Bill Cooper. His theories and predicitions, and I am basing this solely on the video above seem to be a combination of his own geopolitical observations and Islamic mysticism connected to end times prophesy. But I really don't know.

He's highly educated and a prolific author of high regard apparently.

" He studied Islam, Philosophy and International Relations at several universities and institutions of higher learning. Among them are al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, the Institute of International Relations of the University of the West Indies in Trinidad, the University of Karachi in Pakistan, the Aleemiyah Institute of Islamic Studies in Karachi, Pakistan, and the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, Switzerland."

Yeah it's an extremely complex situation and so many different elements have a vested interest, that it's I don't know what to make of it all. Had I watched Imran Hosein's videos a few years ago, i would've dismissed him a a "mad mullah" or something stupid like that but seeing how tings are panning out, he may not be too far wrong..

Take possible US presidential candidate John Bolton's view that the Egyptian uprising gives Israel another reason to bomb Iran..

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/bolton-israel-bomb-iran-mubarak-falls/

Former US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton said the ouster of embattled Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak would speed the timetable for an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

"Do you think that the Israelis are going to have to strike — they are going to have to take action?" Fox News Republican opinion host Sean Hannity asked the former ambassador on his radio program Monday.

"As you pointed out, ElBaradei ran cover for the Iranians for all those years that he was with the IAEA. And, I just don’t think the Israelis have much longer to wait… they're going to have to act in fairly short order."

"I think that's right," Bolton responded. "I don't think there’s much time to act. And I think the fall of a Egyptian government committed to the peace agreement will almost certainly speed that timetable up."

Bolton chided the protests in Egypt last week, saying that "the real alternative is not Jefferson democracy versus the Mubarak regime, but that it’s the Muslim Brotherhood versus the Mubarak regime, and that has enormous implications for the US, for Israel, and our other friends in the region."

joebucks

http://www.businessinsider.com/israeli-fears-grow-more-acute-2011-2

There's not much Israel can really do at the moment to address the fears of its citizens. But inevitably, the question of pre-emptive action against one or more of its most threatening neighbors will work its way into the public discourse.

Brown Bomber

Brown Bomber wrote: »

He also predicted the influence of Al Jazeera in these revolutions,

The reports of Libya mobilizing its air force against its own people spread quickly around the world. However, Russia's military chiefs say they have been monitoring from space -- and the pictures tell a different story. According to Al Jazeera and BBC, on February 22 Libyan government inflicted airstrikes on Benghazi -- the country's largest city -- and on the capital Tripoli. However, the Russian military, monitoring the unrest via satellite from the very beginning, says nothing of the sort was going on on the ground. At this point, the Russian military is saying that, as far as they are concerned, the attacks some media were reporting have never occurred. The same sources in Russia's military establishment say they are also monitoring the situation around Libya's oil pumping facilities.

Yitzhak Rabin

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Whats your opinion on this? Do you think that Qaddafi fired on protestors? AFAIK the sources for this is coming from people on the ground twittering, rather than MSM.

gizmo

Well according to the coverage (either BBC or CNN, can't remember) yesterday a reporter was taken to an arms dump by locals to show off the armaments they had and the fact that the airforce loyal to Gadaffi had fired upon it. The reporter then said he didn't see any large craters which would indicate the airforce had dropped any kind of heavy ordinance and instead only saw smaller craters which he said, at a push, looked like dumb bombs craters. He then followed it up by suggesting the militia may have been trying to embellish the story somewhat and they couldn't confirm what had actually happened.

Now, while the above events are of course highly debatable, you can't deny either the live coverage of pro-Gaffadi forces shooting at civilians, Gadaffi himself urging his supporters to turn on the protesters or the huge number of people at the border trying to get the hell out of their with all their possessions.

Di0genes

Or the footage of Ghaddafi's son wielding a AK-47 and announcing they have plenty of weapons to defeat the uprising
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTassPUu5LU

Brown Bomber

yekahS wrote: »

Whats your opinion on this? Do you think that Qaddafi fired on protestors? AFAIK the sources for this is coming from people on the ground twittering, rather than MSM.

Truth is I don't know what to make of it all. It's worth pointing out though that it's not just protestors protesting; there's an armed rebellion going on there - rebels supported by the west.

Brown Bomber

gizmo wrote: »

Well according to the coverage (either BBC or CNN, can't remember) yesterday a reporter was taken to an arms dump by locals to show off the armaments they had and the fact that the airforce loyal to Gadaffi had fired upon it. The reporter then said he didn't see any large craters which would indicate the airforce had dropped any kind of heavy ordinance and instead only saw smaller craters which he said, at a push, looked like dumb bombs craters. He then followed it up by suggesting the militia may have been trying to embellish the story somewhat and they couldn't confirm what had actually happened.

Now, while the above events are of course highly debatable, you can't deny either the live coverage of pro-Gaffadi forces shooting at civilians, Gadaffi himself urging his supporters to turn on the protesters or the huge number of people at the border trying to get the hell out of their with all their possessions.

But you also have many dead soliders too. I believe it was reported again by Al Jazeera that hundreds of Libyan soliders were murdered by their own leaders for refusing to fight :rolleyes:.

People aren't leaving solely because of Gadaffi (they lived under Gadaffi) they're leaving because it is the beginning of a civil war formented by France/UK/Israel and the US.

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

Or the footage of Ghaddafi's son wielding a AK-47 and announcing they have plenty of weapons to defeat the uprising
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTassPUu5LU

To be fair I don't believe your opinions can be trusted on this topic as by your own admission:

Di0genes wrote: »

I spent three years editing news for CNN, Al Jazeera

and

Di0genes wrote: »

the occasional stint at the Beeb.

Your certainly not impartial and who's to say your not friendly with these lying bastards who created this fraud?

K-9

That's a bit unfair.

I get the impression on this thread that if nobody does nothing, it's a conspiracy, if they do anything to back up the Revolution, it's a conspiracy!

Brown Bomber

K-9 wrote: »

That's a bit unfair.

I get the impression on this thread that if nobody does nothing, it's a conspiracy, if they do anything to back up the Revolution, it's a conspiracy!

I get what your saying but I think all these scenarios are multi-dimensional, way beyond my powers of understanding.

I think the uprisings/revolutions are legitimate. I lived in the centre of Cairo with an Egyptian family for a few months a couple of years ago so I got a taste of popular opinion, seen & lived the oppression, poverty and corruption they face and the hope behind it all. In fact, it was the build up to an "election" at the time and it was quite dangerous there to be outside. Their desire for positive change is genuine and I am all in favour of the removal of tyrant dictators USraeli puppets or not.

Along with this you undoubtedly imo have intelligence agencies, NGO's and other institutions and shills trying to pervert the natural conclusions so that any reforms are favourable to imperialist and Zionist interests along with others.

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I get what your saying but I think all these scenarios are multi-dimensional, way beyond my powers of understanding.

I think the uprisings/revolutions are legitimate. I lived in the centre of Cairo with an Egyptian family for a few months a couple of years ago so I got a taste of popular opinion, seen & lived the oppression, poverty and corruption they face and the hope behind it all. In fact, it was the build up to an "election" at the time and it was quite dangerous there to be outside. Their desire for positive change is genuine and I am all in favour of the removal of tyrant dictators USraeli puppets or not.

Along with this you undoubtedly imo have intelligence agencies, NGO's and other institutions and shills trying to pervert the natural conclusions so that any reforms are favourable to imperialist and Zionist interests along with others.

So these are legitimate arab uprising that will be twisted by the Imperialist, and Zionist interests?

Out of curiosity, what kind of Revolution do you think should occur, and what revolution will occur thanks to these imperial tinkering?

gizmo

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Truth is I don't know what to make of it all. It's worth pointing out though that it's not just protestors protesting; there's an armed rebellion going on there - rebels supported by the west.

As they should be, their own leaders have already called for them to be murdered by their fellow countrymen so someone needs to help them.

Notice the lack of significant bloodshed in the countries whose leaders have capitulated to the demands of their population, now look at the frankly insane ramblings of Gadaffi as he pushes the country towards all out civil war. Of course, said war probably won't last for too long given the number of army officers who have already defected but with his son's elite guard now meant to be moving into the area with the ammunitions dump discussed earlier, god knows what will happen.

As for the aforementioned twisting, well as long as the country gets a leader its people are happy with then great. If said leader happens to NOT want to blow Israel off the map and doesn't care how many people get killed along the way then even better. I'd say that's the extent of any meddling that's going on at the moment tbh.

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

To be fair I don't believe your opinions can be trusted on this topic as by your own admission:



and



Your certainly not impartial and who's to say your not friendly with these lying bastards who created this fraud?

So CNN and Al J can't be trusted, but RT is an acceptable source?

Brown Bomber

Facts, that's all. Only facts on the table of the UN Security Council saying that weapons were used against peaceful civilians in Libya, or heavy military machinery was used against humanitarian targets, may force the Security Council to consider measures more substantial than political sanctions against the regime.

The thing is, we don’t have any facts. We only have reports from BBC, CNN, and other media, featuring some machine gunner firing his machine gun in the air. At the same time, we don’t see any aircraft attacking; instead, we see people applauding the gunner for looking so cool. If there were a real aircraft attack in progress, they wouldn't be applauding there.

The footage we see on American and British channels looks fake. They create an illusion of military action. Where are the aircraft? Where are the bomb raids? Where are the destruction and casualties we hear so much about? If all that it true, evidence should be now on the table of the Security Council.

Russia's Envoy to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin
http://rt.com/news/intervention-libya-military-nato/

CIA & MI-6 scheme to topple Ghaddafi-Libyan ambassador to Ghana

He further alleged that Western and Arab media organizations, notably CNN, BBC, Al-jazeera and Reuters were all participants in a grand scheme championed by Western nations to deceive the world and create disaffection for the Ghaddafi regime.

“they are all traitors and they are feeding you with lies. I’m not speaking because I like to speak, I have concrete evidence, we have recorded messages between agents of the CIA and agents of the MI-6. I have been reading the papers here in Accra and it is unfortunate because most of them quote BBC, CNN, Reuters."
CIA & MI-6 scheme to topple Ghaddafi-Libyan ambassador to Ghana
http://www.citifmonline.com/index.php?id=1.323013

Thursday, 19 November 2009, 12:06
S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 07 DOHA 000677
EO 12958 DECL: 10/05/2019
TAGS PREL, AMGT, KSPR, QA
SUBJECT: THE MOVE TOWARD AN INTERAGENCY SYNCHRONIZATION
PLAN: THE RESULTS OF EMBASSY DOHA'S THIRD FIELD ASSESSMENT
REF: DOHA 140
Classified By: Ambassador Joseph E. LeBaron for reasons 1.4 (b and d).

20. (C) AL JAZEERA WILL REMAIN A TOOL OF FOREIGN POLICY
-- (C) Over the coming 36 months - in a trend that has held steady over the past three off-sites - the regional Al Jazeera Arabic news channel will continue to be an instrument of Qatari influence, and continue to be an expression, however uncoordinated, of the nation's foreign policy. Qatar will continue to use Al Jazeera as a bargaining tool to repair relationships with other countries, particularly those soured by Al Jazeera's broadcasts, including the United States.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/235574

Brown Bomber

Wednesday, 01 July 2009, 13:34
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 05 DOHA 000432
SIPDIS
EO 12958 DECL: 06/30/2019
TAGS PREL, KPAO, QA, EG, IS, SA, IR, SU
SUBJECT: EMBASSY DOHA'S ANALYSIS OF QATARI PRIME MINISTER'S
AL JAZEERA INTERVIEW
REF: A. DOHA 421 B. DOHA 362 C. DOHA 225 D. DOHA 96 E. DOHA 422
Classified By: Amb Joseph LeBaron, reason 1.4 (B) (D)

Al Jazeera, the most watched satellite television station in the Middle East, is heavily subsidized by the Qatari government and has proved itself a useful tool for the station's political masters.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/214776

gizmo

What makes Libya so different from Egypt and Tunisia though? Are we to assume each uprising was part of some elaborate plot by Western powers to destabilise the region? And we're to ignore the fact that the people in these countries have lived under despotic rulers for decades with no voice of their own?

As for Ghaddafi himself, does he really need a Western conspiracy to make him look bad? Rather than opening a dialogue with those who oppose his 42-year regime he instead decided to call for their slaughter in a televised addresss

As for the Russians, well they'll vote against any intervention by the UN but will happily do their own thing when it comes to their own people i.e. Chechnya.

nyarlothothep

According to Press TV a million text messages encouraging revolution in Syria were sent by Israel. I don't think it has anything to do with this guys predictions but thought I'd stoke the fires of paranoia a bit.

constance tench

Are Vodafone claiming to have influenced the revolution in Egypt?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihvtjqNbyos

studiorat

constance tench wrote: »

Are Vodafone claiming to have influenced the revolution in Egypt?



Vodaphone cut their service as soon as it started, sent their customers pro-government messages. And apparently the actor used was a government mouthpiece. So are they claiming such a thing?

probably

More power to yer elbow.

Smyth

Very selective there.

Have you looked at the rest of it for comparison?

2m48s onwards is....interesting.

Brown Bomber

Here is Sheikh Imran Hossein's take on Libya. He has concluded that taking out Libya is a precursor to an Israeli-NATO attack on Egypt to balkanise and essentially destroy it as a state and rival of Israel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1O5jcx6hbZI

I would point out that IMO he was ultimately proven right on Al Jazeera.

Many of the fabricated anti-Libyan false news stories broke on Al Jazeera, the viagra fuelled rape stories for example.

However,

Amnesty questions claim that Gaddafi ordered rape as weapon of war Human rights organisations have cast doubt on claims of mass rape and other abuses perpetrated by forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, which have been widely used to justify Nato's war in Libya.
Nato leaders, opposition groups and the media have produced a stream of stories since the start of the insurrection on 15 February, claiming the Gaddafi regime has ordered mass rapes, used foreign mercenaries and employed helicopters against civilian protesters.

An investigation by Amnesty International has 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.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/amnesty-questions-claim-that-gaddafi-ordered-rape-as-weapon-of-war-2302037.html

Di0genes

And if you're proved wrong about this BB will you rethink your theory?

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

And if you're proved wrong about this BB will you rethink your theory?

Of course.

Jeboa Safari

Brown Bomber wrote: »

In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi'ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization

Anyone think this might have been a better solution for the area in the long run? It's a fairly poorly thrown together state and possibly would have been better split into 3 states after ww1. Although then again the British Empire didn't exactly do partition very well either