Kissinger Bombshell: Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan targeted to stop food-independence

[lamourlady]

My edit power ran out of time.

This is what gets my goat, even if the American people stand up to the government peacefully, who's to say there won't be plants who will instigate violence just as Brock's link states.  It seems you can't win, eventually they will get their police state with or without the American people's dissent.  Even if the people never stand up, false flags will, still leading to the police state.  They have their freaking hands in everything making it seem almost impossible to ever make a difference. Even if we woke up the world, the elite will always somehow be one step ahead it seems.

[Dig]

Truly amazing that CFR/CIA/MI6/Bilderberg all support the radical islamic fundamentalist Tavistock manufactured Muslim Brotherhood and the UN/CFR poster boy El Baradei. Like Kissinger and Soetoro, he is a nobel war prize winner. And like Kissinger and Soetoro, the CFR cannot say enough about him.

Hey look, here is him giving a 17 minute speech to all of the New World Order cultists at the NY office of the Council on Foreign Relations:

Mohamed ElBaradei at CFR: A World Free of Nuclear Weapons
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbbXL2GFeVo
17 min - 9 Nov 2009 - Uploaded by cfr
Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) speaking at the New York office of the CFR

Here is the CFR 10 months ago promoting their "inside man" by calling him "Egypt's Hero":

Egypt's Hero? | Foreign Affairs
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/66145/steven-a-cook/egypts-hero
26 Mar 2010 ... The return of Mohamed El Baradei to Egypt

Check out his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech:

The Nobel Lecture
http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/2005/ebsp2005n020.html
by IAEA Director General and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate 2005 Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei

Your Majesties, Your Royal Highness, Honourable Members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, The International Atomic Energy Agency and I are humbled, proud, delighted and above all strengthened in our resolve by this most worthy of honours.

[...]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Fifteen years ago, when the Cold War ended, many of us hoped for a new world order to emerge. A world order rooted in human solidarity - a world order that would be equitable, inclusive and effective. But today we are nowhere near that goal.

[...]

Ladies and Gentlemen, The picture I have painted today may have seemed somewhat grim. Let me conclude by telling you why I have hope. I have hope because the positive aspects of globalization are enabling nations and peoples to become politically, economically and socially interdependent, making war an increasingly unacceptable option. Among the 25 members of the European Union, the degree of economic and socio-political dependencies has made the prospect of the use of force to resolve differences almost absurd. The same is emerging with regard to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, with some 55 member countries from Europe, Central Asia and North America. Could these models be expanded to a world model, through the same creative multilateral engagement and active international cooperation, where the strong are just and the weak secure?


The IAEA and the new world order
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HB03Ak04.html
By Kaveh L Afrasiabi


October 11, 2005
Did Mohamed ElBaradei and the IAEA Deserve to Win the Nobel Peace Prize?
http://www.democracynow.org/2005/10/11/did_mohamed_elbaradei_and_the_iaea

World leaders are hailing the International Atomic Energy Agency and its chief Mohamed ElBaradei for their efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. But a number of environmental groups and activists are asserting that the IAEA has actually heightened the threat of nuclear war by promoting nuclear power.

CFR's staged "revolution" in Tunisia a success! They are moving on to Egypt
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=198752.0

[citizenx]

Merely a change in middle management if it goes down.  That is for sure.

[shipgeek]

Operation Egypt Facebook page - open to all

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Operation-Egypt/185645434794129

Internet cut-off.

[Dig]

Merely a change in middle management if it goes down.  That is for sure.

any change manufactured by the Eurocrats leads to more central power...

Russian Revolution

Hitler

Mao's China

Cambodia

[Brocke]

I can connect to aljazeera.net at the moment. The connection just died.

[shipgeek]

I can connect to aljazeera.net at the moment. The connection just died.

Still OK in my country.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/01/201112810059478272.html

Waiting for the sheep to wake up and get out on the streets to overthrow corrupt Berlusconi.
Sarkozy also has to go!

Take down these thieves!
I'll go out and join the movement!

 

[citizenx]

any change manufactured by the Eurocrats leads to more central power...

If there is a change, it will be for a purpose, that is true also.

Mubarak's days were numbered by nature even before politics. His son was seen as too weak to be a proper dictator and he would have had to be one to keep things together after his father's thirty years on the throne.

So, the PTB had to plan for another kind of transition.

[Dig]

CFR's staged "revolution" in Tunisia a success! They are moving on to Egypt
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/electrified-arab-world-revolt-egypt/
By Daniel Tencer
Tuesday, January 18th, 2011 -- 6:44 pm

In a sign that an "electrified" Arab world has been inspired by the events in Tunisia to rise up against their governments, opposition leaders in Egypt have called for an open revolt in the country on January 25. The US branch of the National Association for Change, an umbrella group of activists led by former IAEA chief Mohamed El-Baradei, issued a statement on Tuesday "urging all Egyptians to take to the streets on January 25th to protest the deteriorating conditions caused by the dictatorial Mubarak regime." The message places El-Baradei -- a prominent figure in the international community since his role in Iraqi weapons inspections in 2002 and 2003 -- in virtually direct conflict with President Hosni Mubarak, who is generally considered an ally of Washington and whose government receives billions in US aid yearly. The call for a revolt comes as several Egyptians set themselves on fire in protest this week, apparently inspired by the Tunisian uprising last week that started the same way.  A man set himself ablaze on Tuesday in Cairo and another in Alexandria, Egyptian officials said. The incidents follow a similar one in Cairo on Monday in which a man poured fuel on himself and set himself on fire on a busy street in front of the People's Assembly (see video below). In its statement, the Association for Change said it hopes "to capitalize on the overwhelming sense of hope and optimism filling the Egyptian street. The plan is to continue the protests until the regime takes material steps towards democratization which is Egypt’s only way out of the dire situation it is currently facing." That "sense of hope and optimism" was also detected by New York Times correspondent Anthony Shadid, who told Democracy Now! that the revolt in Tunisia "has electrified people across the Arab world ... mainly for that prospect of change, that change can actually occur in a lot of countries that seem almost ossified at this point." Speaking from Lebanon, Shadid warned that the revolts could turn ugly. "Everyone is pretty much bracing for a few grim weeks, even months, ahead," Shadid said. "What makes it so combustible is that it cuts across questions of sect, of ideology, of the conflict with Israel." In Jordan earlier this week, Twitterers showed a surprising amount of nerve when they openly criticized Queen Rania over her Tweet that she was "watching developments in Tunisia and praying for stability and calm for its people." Responses included "lol Jordan is next!" and "start palace hunting in Jedda [Saudi Arabia, where Tunisia's ruler Zine Abidine Ben Ali fled]."

The LA Times described the Tweets as "ominous." The protests have also spread to Algeria, where a father-of-six became the fifth Algerian to turn himself into a human fireball this week, in a replica of the immolation protest that triggered the events in Tunisia, according to local reports. The unemployed 36-year-old soaked himself in petrol before setting light to himself outside a departmental assembly in the El Oued region, after demanding a job and housing, the Arabic language El Khabar daily said. The president of the assembly, which is close to the border with Tunisia, managed to put out the flames with a fire extinguisher, the paper added. Four other Algerians have carried out similar protests since January 12. They were all following the example set by 26-year-old Mohamed Bouazizi who died after setting himself ablaze at a protest in Tunisia in mid-December. His death sparked an uprising and led to Tunisian President Ben Ali fleeing the country after 23 years in power. A 16-year-old French boy was rushed to hospital Tuesday in a critical condition after setting himself on fire at his school, officials in Marseille said. The boy doused himself in a flammable liquid in the toilets of his private school in the southern city and then set himself alight, rescue service officials said. He has second and third degrees burns over 70 percent of his body, they said. Hospital officials said the boy was in a critical condition. It's may be a sign that the revolt in Tunisia and brewing unrest across the Arab world may also be part of a "youth uprising" that trends analyst Gerald Celente said last week would come to fruition in 2011. Young people from industrial societies around the world will unite on the Internet to overthrow increasingly ineffective elements of globalism that have driven their economies into depression, Celente said. "[The Internet is] exposing the corruptness, the ineptitude and the double dealing going on that [governments] don't want the public to know about," he told RT.

"The more freedom of information that goes out, they're going to start using cyber war and the war on terror to take that Internet freedom away from America." "But in 2011, the game's gonna run out," Celente added. "...On one end, it's a wake-up call and on the other hand it's [an effort to] screw the people." Many observers have commented that the Tunisian revolt could not have happened without the aid of such new-media phenomena as WikiLeaks and Twitter. Adding to that perception is the news that a formerly imprisoned member of the Pirate Party has been given a seat in the newly-formed Tunisian unity government.

They are trying to demonstrate to the sub-elites in America...

"If you let the constitution stand, they will overthrow you. You must burn the constitution to save yourselves."

The thing is...the staged "leaks" are manufactured by the Bilderbergers. This is the "watchmen" we have been told about. This is the planned and staged "revolution" to bring about a "NEW WORLD ORDER".

It is 100% controlled by the same psychos that controlled Mao, Stalin, Hitler.

Now they are using cybernetics to perfectly fine tune a rapid movement to neo-feudalism where no middle men or middle class is required!

NWO's Apache’s Oil and Natural Gas Production in Egypt Unaffected by Protests
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199668.0

Bilderberg's Harper: Canada supports the CIA/Soros Coup d'etat in Euro-Arabia
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199667.0

Did a new 9/11 False Flag almost go off at Davos to be blamed on "left wingers" or was it just a dry run simulation?
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199665.0

[shipgeek]

Al Jazeera live streaming coming from Cairo

http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/

More than double numbers of protesters in Cairo today than they were on the 25th.

[Dig]

If there is a change, it will be for a purpose, that is true also.

Mubarak's days were numbered by nature even before politics. His son was seen as too weak to be a proper dictator and he would have had to be one to keep things together after his father's thirty years on the throne.

So, the PTB had to plan for another kind of transition.

30 years? He is lucky so far...Bilderberg executed Saddam Hussein 24 years after they put him in power. And the British Agent Adolf Hitler was taken out without even getting 10 years.

But, if you obey all of the NWO directives...you can rule for over 50 years like Castro.

Amazing that there is no "Jasmine Revolution" in Rockefeller's Cuba.

[shipgeek]

30 years? He is lucky so far...Bilderberg executed Saddam Hussein 24 years after they put him in power. And the British Agent Adolf Hitler was taken out without even getting 10 years.

But, if you obey all of the NWO directives...you can rule for over 50 years like Castro.

Amazing that there is no "Jasmine Revolution" in Rockefeller's Cuba.

I agree that El Baradei is a NWO/CFR puppet.
This movement might be manipulated. Let's see what gives.

The AlJazeera feed is interesting still. Sound gets cut off and then back on.
I am watching.

[citizenx]

Castro got some of those Latin longevity genes, too.  Mubarak just doesn't seem to be quite so lucky.

He was pretty obedient, too.  Just not as lucky as Fidel.

I think this has less to do with him personally than the future.

[lamourlady]

You know what. I don't care if there were planted moles to instigate that violent protest...the fact is that we should be able to get that many people to stand up to their government.  They have changed the hearts of those people forever...igniting in them a power they may have never know to be within their very souls!

Sorry, I am preparing for a midnight shift tonight and I am dead to the world, but I have to find something positive in all of this or else I will lose a small spark that keeps me going in this war against the NWO.

Goodnight Infowarriors!

[Dig]

I agree that El Baradei is a NWO/CFR puppet.
This movement might be manipulated. Let's see what gives.

The AlJazeera feed is interesting still. Sound gets cut off and then back on.
I am watching.

Just be aware of Tarpley's analysis:

Wikileaks Is The “Cognitive Infiltration” Operation Demanded by Cass Sunstein
http://www.infowars.com/wikileaks-is-the-cognitive-infiltration-operation-demanded-by-cass-sunstein/
Webster G. Tarpley
Tarpley.net January 22, 2011

Awareness is growing around the world that the Wikileaks-Julian Assange theater of the absurd is radically inauthentic – a psyop. Wikileaks and its impaired boss represent a classic form of limited hangout or self-exposure, a kind of lurid striptease in which the front organization releases doctored and pre-selected materials provided by the intelligence agency with the intent of harming, not the CIA, nor the UK, nor the Israelis, but rather such classic CIA enemies’ list figures as Putin, Berlusconi, Karzai, Qaddafi, Rodriguez de Kirchner, etc. In Tunisia, derogatory material about ex-President Ben Ali leaked by Wikileaks has already brought a windfall for Langley in the form of the rare ouster of an entrenched Arab government.   

At Foggy Bottom and Langley, a manic fit has been building since the flight of Ben Ali. US imperialist planners now believe they can re-launch their shopworn model of the color revolution, CIA people-power coup, or postmodern putsch against a whole series of countries in the Arab world and far beyond, including Italy. The color revolutions had been looking tarnished lately, as a result of the failure of the Twitter Revolution in Iran back in June 2009. Previously, the Cedars Revolution of 2005 had failed in Lebanon. The Orange Revolution in Ukraine had been rolled back with the ouster of NATO-IMF kleptocrats Yushchenko and Timoshenko. In Georgia, the Roses Revolution was increasingly discredited by the repressive and warmongering regime of fascist madman Saakashvili.

US Seeks to Mobilize a New Generation of Young Nihilists Across the Globe

MORE...

And also check out the Neo-Cons...

Bush and Cyber Dissidents at SMU
http://parkcitiesblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/04/bush-and-cyber-dissidents-at-s.html
10:41 AM Mon, Apr 19, 2010 | Lori Stahl/Reporter  

Former President George W. Bush kicked off the "Cyber-Dissidents: Global Success and Challenges" conference today at SMU. The one-day conference is hosted by the Bush Institute and Freedom House, a human rights organization. The program features several live bloggers and includes presentations by people who've used technology to circumvent repressive regimes in Iran, Cuba, Chile, Syria and elsewhere. For more about the program, visit the Bush Institute website.

Guess where the Largest Conference on Cyber Dissent against government power was held?

US Cyberterrorists describe how they engaged in state sponsored acts against gov

The Conference on Cyber Dissidents: Global Successes and Challenges

George W. Bush Institue
http://georgewbushinstitute.com/the-conference-on-cyber-dissidents-global-successes-and-challenges/

Extending the reach of freedom “is the urgent need of our nation’s security and the calling of our time.”
– President George W. Bush, Second Inaugural Address

The first of the Bush Institute’s Human Freedom events, co-Sponsored by Freedom House Institute in Action
– A Report on the Bush Institute’s Conference on Cyber Dissidents

Agenda Speaker biographies Freedom House Berkman Center

Press and blog coverage:

Boston Globe Wall Street Journal USAToday The Economist Ethan Zuckerman’s Blog I. II, III Commentary, II
Voices of Freedom Online Ahed Al Hendi, Syria www.twitter.com/Ahedalhendi www.cyberDissidents.org
Rodrigo Diamanti, Venezuela Un Mundo Sin Mordaza – A World Without Censorship www.sinmordazaorg.blogspot.com/
Ernesto Hernández Busto, Cuba www.penultimosdias.com
Arash Kamangir, Iran kamangir.net
Oleg Kozlovsky, Russia Oborona Youth Movement www.olegkozlovsky.wordpress.com/
Isaac Mao, China www.isaacmao.com www.blog.cnblog.org
Mohsen Sazegara, Iran (Visiting Fellow, George W. Bush Institute) www.sazegara.net/english/
Oscar Morales Guevara, Colombia (Visiting Fellow, George W. Bush Institute) www.twitter.com/oscarmoralesg
Yoani Sánchez, Cuba www.twitter.com/yoanisanchez www.desdecuba.com/generationy

The Conference on Cyber Dissidents highlighted the work, methods, courage and achievements of its eight dissident guest speakers, from seven nations.  Five of these nations are places where freedom has been extinguished (all rated “not free” by Freedom House): China, Cuba, Iran, Syria, and Russia.  Two others are places where freedom is in peril (both rated “partly free” by Freedom House) because of an authoritarian government accumulating more power, as in Venezuela, or because of the threat of internal terrorist groups, as in Colombia.  

All of the dissidents who were able to join the Conference are key leaders; several must live in exile; two have served extensive time as political prisoners.  And all of them have made use of new online, Internet and mobile technologies in their non-violent struggle against state oppression, lack of press freedom and official and unofficial terror and violence. The Conference is the inaugural event of the The George W. Bush Institute’s Area of Focus on Human Freedom, and includes the Institute’s first two Visiting Fellows in Human Freedom: Oscar Morales, from Colombia, and Mohsen Sazegara, from Iran.  The co-sponsor of the event was Freedom House, the non-partisan organization founded by Eleanor Roosevelt and Wendell Willkie in 1941.  The Conference honored the work and the courage of the dissidents who spoke and the aspirations for freedom in each of their countries they represent.

As James K. Glassman told the attendees, the Bush Institute and Freedom House hope  their work “will become a beacon to others, who can be both inspired and educated. At few times in history, has work like theirs been more important.”  And when the “voices of freedom and tolerance face serious challenges,” as Laura W. Bush said, President Bush “and I believe it is vital that they know that the people of the United States stand behind them.” But the Institute’s mission is not merely to appreciate the great ideas and (in this case) the courage of people who stand up for them, but to take action that engages and enables these ideas to work in the practical world.  Accordingly, the Conference’s work focused on two challenges:

How best to make use of the new tools that Internet and wireless technology have placed in the hands of contemporary dissidents and citizen freedom movements on four continents
How to overcome the use of the same tools in the hands of the enemies of freedom, in the specific countries where our speakers work and elsewhere.

Today’s dissidents have more ways than ever to exchange information, organize resistance, and share their message with the outside world. At the same time, the same advances in technology also enable repressive governments not only to meet these efforts, but themselves to become more efficient at censorship, identifying dissenters and quashing expressions of dissent in the press, on the Internet or in the streets.  The Conference’s two goals were to bring dissidents together to share best practices and learn from one another, and to learn ourselves what we in America and other democracies can do to aid the work of dissidents – in particular, to help them protect and enhance their high-tech tools and counter the technological counter-assaults from government and terror groups.

The fascinating practical discussions among the dissidents were framed by presentations from many U.S. experts which put their struggle in context, and reported on the use of cyber tools by repressive regimes. Christopher Walker and Robert Guerra from Freedom House presented their new research, just released today, about how authoritarian governments such as those in China, Iran and Russia are pursuing media and information strategies that are increasingly sophisticated – and are in the habit of sharing their expertise with one another. China, for example, has been at the forefront of a growing trend toward “outsourcing” censorship and surveillance to private companies – ISPs, cybercafés, and mobile phone providers. These governments are at the forefront of a kind of globalization of authoritarianism.

The Berkman Center’s Ethan Zuckerman and Hal Roberts discussed their work on how “circumvention technology” can work to evade online censorship.  David Keyes, the director of the private organization CyberDissidents.org contributed his insights to the problem as well. Several speakers from past and present U.S. Administrations and from the U.S. State Department, all of whom had or still have direct responsibility for supporting democracy and good governance abroad.  The luncheon keynote was Dr. Jeffrey Gedmin, who is President and CEO of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.  We also heard from Daniel Baer, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor; Jennifer L. Windsor, Executive Director of Freedom House, who worked at USAID as Director of the Center for Democracy and Governance during both Clinton Administrations;  Steve Hadley, who served in the Administrations of George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush (as National Security Advisor to the President); and three others who served in President Bush’s Administration: Goli Ameri, now a member of Freedom House’s board who was Assistant Secretary of State; Kristen Silverberg, who was U.S. Ambassador to the E.U., and of course Jim Glassman, who was Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy. The message was clear – Americans and American Administrations from before the fall of the Berlin Wall to today have made a difference to those who are struggling for human freedom.  This support must and will continue – but we need to be aware of changing circumstances.

While the desire for human freedom in the face of oppression is an absolute, the means to achieve freedom and how those who desire it join hands with others is constantly changing and developing.  The desire for freedom can be also described as an intellectual and political discipline, as Dr. Peter Ackerman spoke of it at the conference: a technique that can be learned, improved and perfected.  But like any discipline that can be learned, its practitioners need to keep abreast of new developments and new tools that change the techniques and methods.  The Conference on Cyber Dissidents was a first step, an investigation, toward the ultimate goal of developing a plan of action that can be used by many – nonviolent dissidents themselves, of course, but also by those in our government, in non-profits, and even by such companies with technological prowess and a sense of human citizenship as Google and Facebook, to ensure that the cyber tools that empower freedom of expression and communication are kept free of interference from the enemies of freedom.

White House posts summary of secret Bush cyber plan, but its list of goals gives few details
http://blog.taragana.com/index.php/archive/white-house-posts-summary-of-secret-bush-cyber-plan-but-its-list-of-goals-gives-few-details/
By Lolita C. Baldor, AP March 2nd, 2010


WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Tuesday gave the public a peek at the Bush administration's classified plan to secure the nation's computer systems, but the newly revealed list of broad goals provided few surprises and key provisions remain secret. The decision to publish a summary of the cyber initiative on the White House blog came just a month after the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking release of the computer security document. Privacy advocates and other groups have long fought to get the Bush cyber plan made public, concerned that it discussed surveillance activities and Internet traffic monitoring by intelligence agencies that could violate Americans' personal privacy. The government's precautions for dealing with cyber security has become a critical national security issue, as U.S. computers have been continually attacked and scanned by hackers, criminals and terrorists looking to steal money, data and state secrets. U.S. officials and cyber experts have repeatedly warned that the nation is not adequately prepared for a cyber attack. Government and key private computer systems — such as those that run the electric grid or nuclear power plants — must be better protected, the critics say. While the new White House posting did not provide details on the Bush-era classified cyber plan, one privacy group welcomed the public disclosure as a good first step for the Obama White House, which has pledged to run a more open, transparent government. "The White House should be credited with beginning an important public discussion about the future of cybersecurity," said Marc Rotenberg, EPIC's executive director. Rotenberg added, however, that the entire document still needs to be made public, including the legal authorities the government operates under and the privacy safeguards it employs when scrutinizing Internet traffic for cyber threats. White House cyber coordinator Howard Schmidt announced the decision to make the summary public Tuesday at a San Francisco computer security conference. Transparency is particularly vital in areas like the cyber initiative, Schmidt said, "where there have been legitimate questions about sensitive topics like the role of the intelligence community in cybersecurity." He said the move would the public to participate in discussions on "how we can use the extraordinary resources and expertise of the intelligence community with proper oversight for the protection of privacy and civil liberties.  The list of 12 initiatives needed to defend U.S. networks and counter cyber threats, though, are largely familiar efforts that have been discussed for the past two years. They include the ongoing development of a sophisticated system, called Einstein 3, that would detect and deter cyber attacks against U.S. government computers. The initiatives also include plans to make sure high-tech products bought by the U.S. are protected, and not being used by hackers to steal data or infiltrate systems. The January 2008 presidential directive was signed by President George W. Bush as an attempt to better coordinate the protection of the nation's computer networks as well as its offensive cyber strategies. President Barack Obama requested a broad review of the nation's cyber security shortly after he took office, and late last year he brought in Schmidt, a former eBay and Microsoft executive, to become the government's cyber coordinator.

As Tunisia's army quells chaos, will it hinder democracy?
http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/01/21/abaza.tunisia.military/index.html?eref=rss_topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+rss/cnn_topstories+(RSS:+Top+Stories)
By Khairi Abaza, Special to CNN
January 22, 2011 8:58 a.m. EST

Editor's note: Khairi Abaza is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a non-partisan policy institute that aims to promote democracy.

Prison Planet Forum Poster's note: The Foundation for Defense of Democracies is a neocon thinktank founded right after the 911 attacks. This guy is coming from a neocon perspective: advocating military dictatorship in Tunisia, using "defense of democracy" as his cover. See note following this article for info about the neocon Foundation for Defense of Democracies - and the membership that reveals (by their support) the true agenda of this fake "democracy" supporting thinktank.

(CNN) -- The fear and chaos that follows the fall of the Tunisian dictator Zine El Abedine Ben Ali on January 14 raises uncertainty about the country's future. Already, it can be said that Tunisia will never be the same.

The best-case scenario is a move toward a liberal democracy. The worst case is a perpetual state of chaos, followed by another autocratic or even theocratic regime. Whatever the final result, it is clear that the Tunisian army will have a significant role in shaping the future of this North African state.

The Tunisian army, more than any other institution, is helping the country overcome its current state of chaos. When it finally succeeds (chaos cannot endure for too long before exhaustion sets in), an important question looms: What role will the army play in the shaping of the new political order?

Will it genuinely support a liberal democratic order? Or will it help establish a "softer" style autocratic rule -- what we might call "dictator light" -- that will ultimately renew the familiar cycle of Arab autocracy that is a façade of stability, propped up by the West as a counterweight to the threat of an Islamist regime?

An underreported story from Tunisia is that the military actually played a role in the unrest that began in December. Of course, the military did not provoke it (it was an organic uprising), but it adopted policies that contributed in small ways to the Jasmine Revolution's success.

For one, the army refused to use live bullets against the demonstrators. It was for this reason that Ben Ali fired his army chief, Gen. Rachid Ben Ammar, shortly before fleeing the capital, Tunis. Tunisians have acknowledged this patriotic decision; the army sided with the people.

Second, when militias presumably loyal to Ben Ali started to destabilize the country, the army mobilized to protect the population. Indeed, shortly after the appearance of the militias in the streets of Tunisia, the army created emergency hot lines for citizens to call for the army's help. While the military could not be everywhere at once, Tunisians say it was responsive in most instances.

Today, the army is keeping a modicum of order in Tunis and other parts of the country, despite lootings and scenes of chaos. The military also launched an assault on the presidential palace, where forces loyal to Ben Ali are seeking refuge. Thus, it appears the military seeks to bring an end to the Ben Ali era while restoring order to the capital. Indeed, Tunis sets the tone for the rest of the country.

In addition to the militias, the army is arresting some of the more unpopular figures from the Ben Ali regime, including the former head of security and some relatives of Ben Ali's wife, who are accused of corruption.

While the military has acted laudably on the streets of Tunisia in recent days, the West must ensure that the new regime that emerges in Tunis is one in which the military does not play a significant part.

The scene is reminiscent of the 1991 "palace coup" in Algeria. After significant Islamist electoral gains, the army played a role in bringing to power a respected exiled dissident, Mohamed Boudiaf, to lead the country and serve as a popular and respected façade for a military regime. Boudiaf was assassinated shortly after he took office, presumably for promising reform and an end of the military domination of politics.

Afterward, Algeria lapsed into authoritarianism. Two decades later, corruption, unemployment and political frustration are still rife. The regime lacks accountability and transparency.

In Tunisia today, the continued prominence of the military puts the country at risk of a "soft" palace coup that might rip the fruit of this revolution and gradually slide the country into a more "liberal" authoritarian rule.

To best support the Tunisian people and protect Western interests in a durable way, the West should stand firm with the Tunisian people and ensure that the country moves toward a liberal democracy.

Only a real democracy can ensure that the people of Tunisia will be satisfied with the results of their uprising, and only then can the West ensure that theocrats or autocrats do not wrest control of the country.

============================

So... "To best support the Tunisian people and protect Western interests in a durable way, the West should stand firm with the Tunisian people and ensure that the country moves toward a liberal democracy"... and since "the Tunisian army, more than any other institution, is helping the country overcome its current state of chaos", we can see that the author thinks that support for the Tunisian people means to support the Tunisian military to 'overcome the current state of chaos'.

Now, does that sound like someone who's politics are really in "Defense of Democracies"?
It sounds more like the politics of defense: military-industrial-complex-style.
Military dictatorship is good for the MIC.
The "Foundation for Defense of Democracies" is supporting the establishment of a military dictatorship in Tunisia, while throwing obfuscating language (litter your statements with words like 'liberal democracy' and you'll cover the fact that you are seeking the opposite).

Need more proof? Take a look at the members of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies:


======================================================
Board of Directors, advisors and fellows
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_for_Defense_of_Democracies

FDD's president is Clifford D. May.
FDD's executive director is Mark Dubowitz.
FDD’s Leadership Council is composed of prominent thinkers and leaders from the defense, intelligence, and policy communities including Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Bill Kristol, Louis J. Freeh, Joseph Lieberman, Newt Gingrich, Max Kampelman, Robert McFarlane, and James Woolsey.

The members of FDD's Board of Advisors are Gary Bauer, Rep. Eric Cantor, Gene Gately, General P.X. Kelley, Charles Krauthammer, Kathleen Troia "KT" McFarland, Richard Perle, Steven Pomerantz, Oliver "Buck" Revell, and Francis J. "Bing" West.[3]
FDD fellows and senior staff are Jonathan Schanzer, Vice President of Research, Khairi Abaza, Senior Fellow, Tony Badran, Research Fellow, Levant, Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, Director, Center for Study of Terrorist Radicalization, Reuel Marc Gerecht, Senior Fellow. Dr. Sebastian Gorka, Military Affairs Fellow, Thomas Joscelyn, Senior Fellow and Co-Chair, Center for Law and Counterterrorism, Jonathan Kay, Visiting Fellow, Dr. Michael Ledeen, Freedom Scholar, Andrew C. McCarthy, Co-Chair, Center for Law and Counterterrorism, Dr. Emanuele Ottolenghi, Senior Fellow, Dr. J. Peter Pham, Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Dr. Walid Phares, Director, FDD's Future of Terrorism Project, David B. Rivkin, Jr., Senior Fellow and Co-Chair, Center for Law and Counterterrorism[4]

======================================================

Sounds like a reunion for the 911 perps.
These are war-mongers with their fingers in Tunisia.
God help the Tunisian people.

[Dig]

You know what. I don't care if there were planted moles to instigate that violent protest...the fact is that we should be able to get that many people to stand up to their government.  They have changed the hearts of those people forever...igniting in them a power they may have never know to be within their very souls!

Sorry, I am preparing for a midnight shift tonight and I am dead to the world, but I have to find something positive in all of this or else I will lose a small spark that keeps me going in this war against the NWO.

Goodnight Infowarriors!

Everything will be illuminated. This is a staged spark and hopefully something positive will come from it. I am hoping it will wake up the grunts in these cybernetic operations to the fact that many are being used as cannon fodder for elites to continue negotiating amongst themselves while collateral damage gets ignored...


Are the CIA/MI6/William Lynn III/George Soros backstabing Operation Payback?
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199652.0

[shipgeek]

Everything will be illuminated. This is a staged spark and hopefully something positive will come from it. I am hoping it will wake up the grunts in these cybernetic operations to the fact that many are being used as cannon fodder for elites to continue negotiating amongst themselves while collateral damage gets ignored...


Are the CIA/MI6/William Lynn III/George Soros backstabing Operation Payback?
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199652.0

Looks like this is aimed to replace Mubarak by CFR/US puppet El Baradei.

Got to be foreign controlled...

 

[Dig]

Check out Raytheon's Captain James Tiberius Kirk and his new Cyber Bunker for full scale "Jasmine Revolution" operations:

US Cyber Command approved to launch fake Revolutions and coordinate Eurocratic Coups

http://www.neowin.net/news/us-cyber-command-approved-for-launch-in-october
Tzvi Friedman
24 May 2010 - 19:42

In June 2009, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates approved an initiative to start Cyber Command, a subdivision of U.S. Strategic Command that would be responsible for the defense and coordination of all the computer networks under military command. General Keith Alexander is heading up the operation, and his Senate approval for the position is what has been delaying the process. Now, reports Cnet, the order to launch is official, and Cyber Command will open its doors October 1st, 2010. It will manage 15,000 networks in 4,000 military bases in 88 countries, and is seen as a vital and necessary overhaul of the military's offensive and defensive capabilities in the arena of cyber warfare. In other words, this isn't going to be the military's IT department and helpdesk.

The headquarters ... will employ 1,000 people dedicated to enforcing digital boundries.

However good this may be for the military, there are numerous hurdles that have yet to be cleared. Many of them involve the nature of 'cyber warfare' in general, and the jurisdiction Cyber Command has when interagency operations overlap. What is considered a cyber-crime? What is considered an appropriate response to cyber-crime? How will we effectively coordiate our policies with international law? These, and many other legal issues, are wrinkles that are being, and will continue to be, ironed out as the division grows and matures.

Much like the ground forces in Iraq and Afghanistan have had to adapt to changing warfare environments, namely the tactical shift to confusing and cramped urban jungles, CyberCom understands that their biggest threats aren't going to come from the big guns. Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn III has been spearheading and supporting CyberCom from its beginnings. He echoes the idea that the combat and policy philosophy at CyberCom will be very different than at other agencies.

"It doesn't take the resources of a nation state to launch cyberwar. Nations still have the best capabilities, but you can do very threatening and damaging things with modest investments...Our ability to predict where the threats are coming [from], even in conventional threats, is remarkably poor. We didn't see Desert Storm coming. We didn't see the series of events that led to Afghanistan. Foreseeing the threats in cyberspace is harder. With Cyber Command, I think we need to be prepared for the unexpected."
EVIDENCE OF PSYCHOSIS: Deputy Secretary of Defense, William Lynn III, is a psychotic maniac!
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=185006.0

Is this what William Lynn III (A Raytheon Lobbyist and current Deputy Secretary of Defense) is moving towards within the next 10 years?

McChrystal created
special forces military command centre
"Death Star" with "Kill TV"
for leading a secret war
http://www.infiniteunknown.net/2010/06/27/sacked-general-stanley-mcchrystal-created-special-forces-military-command-centre-death-star-with-kill-tv-led-secret-war-raids/
Posted On Jun 27 Global News, Politics

They called it the "Death Star" because according to one source who worked inside it,

"you could just reach out with a finger and eliminate" somebody.

On the walls were television screens, known by the special forces boys as "Kill TV", where footage from image-intensifier cameras of the enemy being blown up by air strikes, or being gunned down by undercover hit teams was shown.

This place was "the Machine", a state-of-the-art military command centre hidden away in an airbase in Balad, a desolate stretch of land north of Baghdad. It was created by Major General Stanley McChrystal, the chief of United States Special Forces, the most secretive force in the American military. Here, in the permanently darkened communications cockpit, dozens of US and British (SAS) personnel would gather around as nightly raids took place against al Qaeda and their insurgent allies. Sometimes McChrystal would lead the raids himself, his squad of elite undercover combat troops, known as Delta Force, being told at the last minute that the commander was coming along for the ride. No one was quite sure what the Pentagon policy was on two star generals going on such dangerous missions, but then very few people in the US Department of Defence, and even fewer outside it in Washington, were even aware of these shadowy operations going on in Iraq.

- INDEPENDENT

By Kim Sengupta
4:00 AM Saturday Jun 26, 2010

[Dig]

IMF ran a test run 2 years ago in Egypt using Kissinger's "food as a weapon" operations:

08 Apr 2008 Egyptians riot over bread crisis
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/2787714/Egyptians-riot-over-bread-crisis.html

04/08/2008 30,000+ Workers in Mahalla Egypt Riot, Security Apparatus kill several and injure hundreds.
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1998718/posts


and look what happened last month...a classic Al-CIA-duh false flag:


CIA/Blackwater Style Gunmen spray crowd with bullets after worshippers leave Christmas Mass
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34736848/ns/world_news-mideast/n_africa/


What was Mubarek's reaction to the obvious false flag:


Egypt's Muslims attend Coptic Christmas mass, serving as "human shields"

Egypt's Muslims attend Coptic Christmas mass, serving as "human shields"
Muslims turned up in droves for the Coptic Christmas mass Thursday night, offering their bodies, and lives, as “shields” to Egypt’s threatened Christian community
http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/3365.aspx
Yasmine El-Rashidi , Friday 7 Jan 2011

Egypt’s majority Muslim population stuck to its word Thursday night. What had been a promise of solidarity to the weary Coptic community, was honoured, when thousands of Muslims showed up at Coptic Christmas eve mass services in churches around the country and at candle light vigils held outside. From the well-known to the unknown, Muslims had offered their bodies as “human shields” for last night’s mass, making a pledge to collectively fight the threat of Islamic militants and towards an Egypt free from sectarian strife. “We either live together, or we die together,” was the sloganeering genius of Mohamed El-Sawy, a Muslim arts tycoon whose cultural centre distributed flyers at churches in Cairo Thursday night, and who has been credited with first floating the “human shield” idea. Among those shields were movie stars Adel Imam and Yousra, popular Muslim televangelist and preacher Amr Khaled, the two sons of President Hosni Mubarak, and thousands of citizens who have said they consider the attack one on Egypt as a whole. “This is not about us and them,” said Dalia Mustafa, a student who attended mass at Virgin Mary Church on Maraashly Street. “We are one. This was an attack on Egypt as a whole, and I am standing with the Copts because the only way things will change in this country is if we come together.” In the days following the brutal attack on Saints Church in Alexandria, which left 21 dead on New Year’ eve, solidarity between Muslims and Copts has seen an unprecedented peak. Millions of Egyptians changed their Facebook profile pictures to the image of a cross within a crescent – the symbol of an “Egypt for All”. Around the city, banners went up calling for unity, and depicting mosques and churches, crosses and crescents, together as one.

Mubarek cut the legs out from under the CIA operatives.

After that, CIA/Soros/Rockefeller had enough and they moved forward with operation "jazzy-coup"

[Anti_Illuminati]

Jay Rockefeller:

"The Internet should have never existed."

[shipgeek]

Mubarek cut the legs out from under the CIA operatives.

After that, CIA/Soros/Rockefeller had enough and they moved forward with operation "jazzy-coup"

What next?
El Baradei and his NWO minions?
The Muslim Brothers?

 

[Anti_Illuminati]

http://freedetainees.org/8536
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-01-25/egypts-internet-crackdown/?cid=hp:justposted1

Egypt’s Internet Crackdown

David Keyes

The crackdown on bloggers in Egypt is as ferocious as anything in Iran, and yet the United States has ignored it. David Keyes on the West’s shameful silence.



On January 15, over two dozen Egyptian bloggers and activists were arrested en route to a show of solidarity following the deaths of six Coptic Christians in the southern province of Qena. Among those detained were some of Egypt’s most famous Internet activists such as Wael Abbas and Ahmad Badawy. The bloggers’ cell phones and IDs were taken by Egyptian police. Though they were released a day later, this crackdown sent shockwaves through the dissident community in Egypt. Wael Abbas was even rearrested and sentenced to six months in prison on the spurious charge of damaging an internet cable.

In the case of Egypt, Edmund Burke’s dictum that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing is far from sufficient..”

The Egyptian government’s ruthless repression of Internet activists shows no signs of easing. On the contrary, one of Egypt’s leading young bloggers attested on condition of anonymity that the regime’s crackdowns have only gotten more sophisticated with every passing month. Though technology has dramatically increased dissidents’ capacity to organize and protest, Princeton historian Bernard Lewis told me that it also gives modern Middle Eastern dictators the ability to “surveil, control and repress undreamt of by Haroun al Rashid, Suliman the Magnificent, al-Hajjaj” and other autocrats of yore.

In the case of Egypt, Edmund Burke’s dictum that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing is far from sufficient. Evil triumphs in Cairo because supposedly good men in the West openly and unapologetically fund and arm it. America has supplied Egypt with approximately 50 billion dollars of aid (primarily military) since Husni Mubarak came to power three decades ago. Stability was supposedly bought at the price of liberty—a fool’s bargain. Instead, Egypt remains impoverished, illiterate, autocratic, corrupt and repressive, not exactly the conditions for lasting stability or peace.

In the summer of 2006, I sat with an Egyptian friend in a Cairo cafe and began to talk politics. He silenced me immediately. “Il hitan liha withan” he said in Arabic. “The walls have ears.” I vividly recall the vast numbers of security forces on the streets of Cairo brandishing guns outfitted with bayonets. How revealing, I thought. The Egyptian regime is afraid, first and foremost, of their own people. This is why they do not trust them to write, think or blog freely. It is also why they need antiquated knives on their ends of their guns. Bayonets will not intimidate any foreign army, but they just might work against bloggers and students.

Last December, 24 year old blogger Kareem Amer’s final appeal was rejected and he now enters his fourth year in prison for the unthinkable crimes of criticizing Egypt’s dictator and “insulting” the predominant religion. A steady parade of Western diplomats have come through Cairo in the past four years and it is fair to ask how many times Kareem’s name has come up. If ever there was a man whose struggle symbolized the values of America—it is him. He is a staunch advocate of Jeffersonian separation of religion and state and is a living exemplar of Patrick Henry’s dictum: give me liberty or give me death. In his last blog post before his arrest, Amer, who hopes one day to open a human rights law firm, wrote “I shall not recant, not even by an inch, from any word I have written.”

I asked one of Egypt’s leading female bloggers who requested that I not publish her name if the recent crackdowns increased fear in the blogging community. “No!” she responded defiantly. “The opposite always happens. When someone deprives you of something, you want it more. Kareem Amer is serving four years in jail because of blogging but this actually increased the number of bloggers not decreased it! The more activists jailed, the more new activists appear.”

The primary explanation for the West’s appeasement of Egyptian autocracy is faulty priorities. Liberty is playing second fiddle to stability and thus neither has been achieved. Rather, the seeds of misery, terror, extremism and poverty are being sown in Egypt with open acquiescence from the West.

The release of heroic dissidents like Kareem Amer will be the one true sign that progress is in motion. American aid should be directly conditioned on Egypt’s respect for freedom of expression. Anything less constitutes appeasement of tyranny and will come back to haunt us.

[larsonstdoc]

You say you want a revolution, but be careful what you wish for
http://rt.com/news/color-revolution-sophisticated-technology/

William Engdahl on RT

  Same MO every time--Revolutions STARTED by provacateurs COACHED BY US INTELLIGENCE SERVICES.  WHEN WILL THE WORLD WAKE UP?

  All these are models for the eventual revolutions in Europe and the US.

  I noticed in the video that THE PEOPLE HAD NO GUNS IN THESE REVOLUTIONS.  Does the CIA start revolutions in GUN-LESS COUNTRIES SPECIFICALLY?

[shipgeek]

  Same MO every time--Revolutions STARTED by provacateurs COACHED BY US INTELLIGENCE SERVICES.  WHEN WILL THE WORLD WAKE UP?

It is clear that this uprising in Egypt has to be orchestrated. The question is... by who and from where.
My take is Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brothers/Islamics rather than intelligence services MI6 or CIA.

 

[Dig]

The use of the Muslim Brotherhood by MI6 and the CIA in Egypt, Syria and Iran
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2005/11/use-of-muslim-brotherhood-by-mi6-and.html
Tuesday, November 29, 2005

The following is taken from http://www.redmoonrising.com/Ikhwan/BritIslam.htm

Prior to World War II British Intelligence cultivated ties with the Brotherhood through agent Freya Stark, the British adventurer and writer (1). These covert connections were used to keep track of the growing German presence in North Africa and to stay informed of the many different political movements that were springing up. The Muslim Brotherhood spread throughout the Muslim world and has evolved into something like a Muslim equivalent of the West's Masonic brotherhood. It became one of the first Islamic Fundamentalist terror organizations...

"According to CIA agent Miles Copeland, the Americans began looking for a Muslim Billy Graham around 1955... When finding or creating a Muslim Billy Graham proved elusive, the CIA began to cooperate with the Muslim Brotherhood, the Muslim mass organization founded in Egypt but with followers throughout the Arab Middle East... This signalled the beginning of an alliance between the traditional regimes and mass Islamic movements against Nasser and other secular forces." (1)

The CIA was following the example of British Intelligence and sought to use Islam to further its goals. They wanted to find a charismatic religious leader that they could promote and control and they began to cooperate with groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood. With the rise of Nasser the Brotherhood was also courted more seriously by the pro-Western Arab regimes of Saudi Arabia and Jordan. They needed all the popular support that they could muster against the rise of Nasser-inspired Arab nationalism to keep their regimes intact.

The Muslim Brotherhood was an obvious ally against Nasser, because he had abolished it from Egypt after it was involved in a failed assassination attempt on his life in 1954. The Brotherhood rejected Nasser's policy that, for the most part, kept religion out of politics. Officially the Brotherhood was an outlawed organization, but it remained influential and active within Egypt working against the secular regime, often hand-in-hand with British Intelligence. In June of 1955 MI6 was already approaching the Brotherhood in Syria to agitate against the new government that showed strong left-wing tendencies and a desire to merge with Egypt (2). The Brotherhood became an even more important asset after Nasser announced the Egyptian takeover of the Suez...

In Syria, in 1982, there was a major conflict between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Syrian government at the city of Hamma that resulted in 20,000 casualties. In the aftermath Syria's President Asad revealed that the Muslim Brotherhood forces were armed with US-made equipment...

Israel, forever inclined to back divisive movements, surfaced as another supporter of Islam and began to fund the Muslim Brotherhood and the Palestinian Islamic movement Hamas." (8 )
The most noteworthy success of the Islamic movement during this time was of course the overthrow of the Shah of Iran and the installation of the Ayatollah Khomeini as the Islamic dictator. British Intelligence had used their contacts with Iran's mullahs and ayatollahs to help overthrow Mossadegh and install the Shah back in 1953, and these contacts were maintained and used again to overthrow the Shah when his regime fell out of favor.

The Establishment history of Iran's Islamic Revolution is that Khomeini's revolt was spontaneous and populist, and that it overthrew a repressive dictatorship that was hated by the people but supported wholeheartedly by the United States. It is true that the Shah's government was not a democracy and that his secret service, trained by the CIA, was one of the most effective intelligence organizations in the world. But what is not reported is that prior to the British-sponsored massive public relations campaign on behalf of the Ayatollah the government of the Shah was loved by the vast majority of the population.

After taking over from Mossadegh the Shah began to push forward a number of nationalist policies that increased his popularity at home but, in some cases, worried the Anglo-American Establishment. First, he signed petroleum agreements with ENI, the Italian oil company. Then in 1963 he pushed forward on a series of popular reforms that became known as the White Revolution. The Shah evolved into a nationalist whose path paralleled that of Nasser far too much for the Establishment's liking:

- He bought land from the upper classes and, along with the crown's own land, sold it back cheaply to tenant farmers, allowing over one a half million people to become land owners and ending the old feudal system.

- He allowed women the right to vote, and brought an end to the wearing of the veil, which were "Westernizing" moves unwelcomed by the religious sector.

- He pushed forward on a $90 billion nuclear power program.

- He moved to shut down the lucrative opium industry that had been created during the days of British Empire control that had been running for a hundred years. (9)...

The attack on the Shah's government came through the Muslim Brotherhood and through the mullahs and ayatollahs of Iran, supported and manipulated by British Intelligence...

Dr. John Coleman, a former British Intelligence agent... states in his report on Iran's Islamic Revolution (11) that the Muslim Brotherhood was created by "the great names of British Middle East intelligence" ...and that their mission was to "keep the Middle East backward so that its natural resource, oil, could continue to be looted..."

Dr. Coleman writes that in 1980 the broadcasts of Radio Free Iran divided the enemies of the Shah into four categories: 1. Iranian politicians bought by the Israeli Shin Bet, 2. The CIA's network of agents, 3. The feudal landowners, 4. The Freemasons and the Muslim Brotherhood (viewed as the same enemy).

In his report Dr. Coleman writes that in Iran, "At one time there was even a joke about the mullahs being stamped 'made in Britain.'" When the Shah introduced his plan for modernization in 1963 the Ayatollah Khomeini emerged as the leader of the religious opposition. Up until his exile from Iran in 1964, Khomeini was based at the religious city of Qom. Dr. Coleman relates that Radio Free Iran claimed that while at Qom Khomeini received a "monthly stipend from the British, and he is in constant contact with his masters, the British."

Notes http://www.redmoonrising.com/Ikhwan/BritIslam.htm

[larsonstdoc]

It is clear that this uprising in Egypt has to be orchestrated. The question is... by who and from where.
My take is Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brothers/Islamics rather than intelligence services MI6 or CIA.

 

  We cannot leave out the Mossad.

[larsonstdoc]

THEY ARE THE SAME THING!

  QFT

[shipgeek]

 We cannot leave out the Mossad.

This was one of my thoughts long before this new riots starded.
What role does Israel/Mossad play in this uprising?

[larsonstdoc]

This was one of my thoughts long before this new riots starded.
What role does Israel/Mossad play in this uprising?

  Well they are all linked--CIA, Mossad, MI5, MI6, AND THEIR PROVOCATEURS.

[Dig]

BCCI AND THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=uk_secret_intelligence_service


1954-1970: CIA and the Muslim Brotherhood Ally to Oppose Egyptian President Nasser


In 1954, Egyptian President Gamal Abddul Nasser’s nationalist policies in Egypt come to be viewed as completely unacceptable by Britain and the US. MI6 and the CIA jointly hatch plans for his assassination. According to Miles Copeland, a CIA operative based in Egypt, the opposition to Nasser is driven by the commercial community—the oil companies and the banks. At the same time, the Muslim Brotherhood’s resentment of Nasser’s secular government also comes to a head. In one incident, Islamist militants attack pro-Nasser students at Cairo University. Following an attempt on his own life by the Brotherhood, Nasser responds immediately by outlawing the group, which he denounces as a tool of Britain. The following years see a long and complex struggle pitting Nasser against the Muslim Brotherhood, the US, and Britain. The CIA funnels support to the Muslim Brotherhood because of “the Brotherhood’s commendable capability to overthrow Nasser.” [Baer, 2003, pp. 99; Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 101-108] The Islamist regime in Saudi Arabia becomes an ally of the United States in the conflict with Nasser. They offer financial backing and sanctuary to Muslim Brotherhood militants during Nasser’s crackdown. Nasser dies of natural causes in 1970.


1984 and After: US and British Intelligence Are Aware that Terrorist Abu Nidal Is Using BCCI in London, but Take No Action

Abu Ndal circa 1982. [Source: Reuters / Corbis]
The BBC will later suggest that US intelligence actually becomes aware of specific Abu Nidal accounts held in the criminal BCCI bank in 1984. This is because the FBI busts an illegal arms deal in New York City that involved Nidal’s BCCI accounts in London and a Nidal front company in Poland called SAS Trade at this time. [Herald Sun (Melbourne), 8/2/1991] In the 1980s, Nidal is considered the world’s most wanted terrorist. In December 1985, for instance, his network launches simultaneous attacks in Rome and Vienna, killing or wounding dozens. In 1986, the CIA tells the State Department in detail about the criminal BCCI bank’s links with Nidal and his terrorist network. They reveal that Nidal has multiple accounts at BCCI branches in Europe. [Beaty and Gwynne, 1993, pp. 328] In July 1987, Ghassan Qassem, manager of one of BCCI’s London branches, is contacted by the British intelligence agencies MI5 and MI6. They tell him that they know SAS Trade has many millions of dollars worth of accounts in his branch and that the company is an Abu Nidal front. Qassem agrees to be an informant. [Observer, 1/18/2004] Nidal first opened a BCCI account in London in 1980, depositing $50 million using an alias. In addition to being a terrorist, Nidal is an illegal arms dealer and BCCI helps him buy and sell weapons, oftentimes involving British companies. [Los Angeles Times, 9/30/1991] Qassem will later claim that he saw Nidal in Britain on three separate occasions and went shopping with him. In 1983, Nidal was interviewed by police, who took him straight to the airport and put him on a plane to leave the country. [Guardian, 7/30/1991; Observer, 1/18/2004] Qassem recognizes Nidal as a terrorist from a photograph in a magazine in 1987 and tells this to his BCCI superior, but he is told to keep quiet. The CIA and British intelligence use their knowledge of Nidal’s BCCI accounts to force SAS Trade to shut down in 1986, but usually they merely monitor terrorist activity. For instance, Nidal’s group teaches urban terrorist tactics to Peru’s Maoist Shining Path guerrillas in 1988. Shining Path pays Nidal $4 million for this work through his BCCI account and then attempts to bomb the US embassy in Lima later that year. Intelligence agencies also merely watch as Middle Eastern governments give tens of millions to Nidal through his BCCI accounts (see 1987-1990). In December 1989, Qassem tells his BCCI superiors that he is working with British intelligence. He is quickly fired. [Los Angeles Times, 9/30/1991] Nidal learns of the surveillance and empties the accounts before they can be frozen. [Guardian, 7/30/1991; Observer, 1/18/2004]

[Dig]

This was one of my thoughts long before this new riots starded.
What role does Israel/Mossad play in this uprising?

Israeli neo-cons need a new enemy, Iran has already cut their deals with China/Russia. The CFR puppet is ElBaradei is the perfect fake new world order enemy to sraeli neocons. Mubarek is too peaceful with Israel and with Christians.

[shipgeek]

The CFR puppet is ElBaradei is the perfect fake new world order enemy to sraeli neocons.

Fully agree with this 1000%. Not a doubt.
The question is do the Egyptian people want to have ElBaradei replacing Mubarak?
What will come next?

Obama and his administration will undoubtedly do everything they can to recuperate this uprising.

[larsonstdoc]

Israeli neo-cons need a new enemy, Iran has already cut their deals with China/Russia. The CFR puppet is ElBaradei is the perfect fake new world order enemy to sraeli neocons. Mubarek is too peaceful with Israel and with Christians.

  Yes, another FAKE NWO Enemy.

[Dig]

Fully agree with this 1000%. Not a doubt.
The question is do the Egyptian people want to have ElBaradei replacing Mubarak?

NO!!!!

It is less than 100,000 in a country of 80 million!

Muslim Brotherhood was just voted out of the parliament in November!

THIS IS A US/UK COUP!

[shipgeek]

Any chance we will see this kind of uprising nationwide in the U.S., the U.K., Italy, Germany or France or are our people too asleep to go on the streets and fight for their rights and oust their leaders and governments?

[Dig]

NO!!!!

It is less than 100,000 in a country of 80 million!

Muslim Brotherhood was just voted out of the parliament in November!

THIS IS A US/UK COUP!

It is as if Code Pink or the 9/12 movement was given NORAD/NATO/Pentagon command and control information, overwatch surveillance data, and cyber black operations teams in the middle of one of their 100,000 men marches and the legislative branch had to go to Mexico.

DO YOU THINK ANYONE WOULD WANT THAT?

Then CSIS would come in with full CONTINUITY OF GOVERNMENT:

Absolute proof CSIS is planning to usher in new government
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=191186.0

http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/080606_managingthenextdomesticcatastrophe.pdf

Executive Summary

America is not ready for the next catastrophe. Almost seven years have passed since the nation was attacked here at home by violent Islamist extremists who remain free and who have made clear their willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against the United States, should they be able to acquire or build them. Almost three years have passed since Hurricane Katrina devas- tated the Gulf Coast and laid bare myriad flaws in the nation’s preparedness and response system. Simply creating the Homeland Security Council, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and U.S. Northern Command was not enough to make the country prepared. There are still no detailed, government-wide plans to respond to a catastrophe. There is still considerable confusion over who will be in charge during a disaster. There are still almost no dedicated military forces on rapid alert to respond to a crisis here at home.

There are still no guidelines to determine and assess the capabilities that states, cities, and towns should have to ensure they are prepared for the worst. To be sure, a number of significant steps have been taken, and the nation is clearly more prepared than it was seven or eight years ago. There is a National Homeland Security Strategy that provides overall direction for the federal government’s homeland security policies and programs. Hundreds, if not thousands, more people focus each and every day on improving national preparedness than before the September 11 attacks.

A National Response Framework describes how the federal government will work with state, local and tribal governments as well as the private sector and nongovernmental organizations during domestic incidents. Fifteen National Planning Scenarios have been drawn up to guide government planning for catastrophes. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has developed more than 200 prescripted mission as- signments across 27 federal agencies to strengthen and streamline response capabilities in advance of actual events. The Department of Defense is creating a trained and ready Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and High-Yield Explosives (CBRNE) Consequence Management force that will be able to respond rapidly during a catastrophe, and the National Guard has almost completed its development of 17 CBRNE Emergency Response Forces spread around the country to help bridge the gap between the immediate response to a crisis and the arrival of more extensive federal capabilities.

Although significant progress has been made in the past several years– with many achievements extremely hard-won, through the tireless work of senior leaders and public servants across the government—what ultimately matters to the American public is not how far we have come but how far away we still are from being prepared for the next catastrophe. The task of readying America to face the threats of the post–September 11 era is an enormous one and poses a fundamental challenge for the next President.

Preventing, protecting against, preparing for, and responding to a domestic catastrophe are basic tasks of government at all levels. Unfortunately, today’s efforts to provide homeland security, particularly at the federal level, are not unlike the governmental equivalent of a children’s soccer game. One can see a tremendous amount of activity under way and considerable energy on the field, but the movements are often not very well coordinated. Players tend to huddle around the ball—in this case, whatever happens to be the crisis or headline issue of the day—and follow it wherever it goes, even if in doing so they neglect their assigned positions. In such an environment, it is not impossible to score a goal, but that outcome is usually due more to luck than to skill. Given that this is not a competition the nation can afford to lose, what can be done to improve America’s odds?

The key for the next Administration will be to bring order to the relationships, processes, and implementation of its homeland security system. Which organizations at the federal, state, and local level will perform what roles, who is the lead official at each level of the response, and how do all the players work together as a team? What processes should guide how stakeholders interact and ensure that everyone is working toward the same goals? What plans are needed to prepare the government to deal effectively with future catastrophes, and how should government at all levels decide what it needs so that it can execute those plans? Finally, how can the government translate its strategies and plans into trained and ready capabilities on the ground that can be deployed effectively in accordance with comprehensive, integrated plans developed in advance of a specific catastrophe?

Many of the building blocks required to move the country toward being truly prepared to handle a catastrophe already exist in some form, but the next Administration needs to bring the pieces together, fill in the gaps, and provide the resources necessary to get the job done. If implemented, the following major recommendations –slightly condensed from their full discussion in the body of this report—would go a long way toward getting America ready to manage the next domestic catastrophe, whatever form it might take.


Recommendations

■ Merge the National Security Council and Homeland Security Council into a single organization with a single staff.

The U.S. government has artificially separated homeland security from national security. Securing the homeland is a matter of national security—and it has both domestic and international components. Dividing homeland security from national security has resulted in fractured, partial solu- tions and has greatly weakened the ability of the federal government to generate unity of effort. Merging the National Security and Homeland Security Councils and their staffs will greatly enhance the federal government’s ability to develop holistic strategies and policies, and it will ensure that the homeland security aspects of national security policy are also supported by the political and bureaucratic power of the White House.

■ Establish a clear chain of command inside DHS to ensure that the Secretary can carry out his or her responsibility to serve as the federal government’s coordinator for incident management.

The relationship between DHS and FEMA continues to be murky and confusing. If the Hurricane Katrina experience showed anything, it illustrated the perils of not having a clear understanding of who is in charge of what—both in Washington and in the field—during a catastrophe. The absence of a clear framework for the DHS-FEMA relationship has had an extremely pernicious effect on homeland security policy in the past several years and has noticeably hampered the federal government’s efforts to improve preparedness. The next Administration and Congress should work together to put into a law a clear chain of command, from the President down to the field level, for the coordination of domestic incidents.

Under this new clarified framework, the Secretary of Homeland Security will serve as the principal federal coordinator of domestic incidents as directed in Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) 5, “Management of Domestic Incidents,” and will report directly to the President. While the FEMA Administrator should be able to advise the President directly on the subset of emergency management matters, as specified in law, the operational chain of command for the overall incident should run from the President to the Secretary of Homeland Security, and then within DHS from the Secretary to the FEMA Administrator. In the field, the DHS chain of command during an incident should extend to the 10 FEMA Regional Administrators, who would execute their responsibilities on the ground through designated “Lead Federal Coordinators,” as discussed in more detail in the following recommendation. During a catastrophe, the Lead Federal Coordinator would be the single federal official on the ground responsible for coordinating the overall federal effort with all of the other response efforts.

■ Consolidate the positions of Principal Federal Official and Federal Coordinating Officer into the single position of Lead Federal Coordinator, who would report through the FEMA Administrator to the Secretary of Homeland Security.

During and after a catastrophe, there must be one DHS official on the ground, responsible to the President and accountable for the agency’s performance. It makes no sense to have a Principal Federal Official (PFO) who reports to the Secretary of Homeland Security and lacks line authority over a Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO) who reports to the FEMA Administrator, particularly when the FEMA Administrator works for the Secretary and FEMA is part of DHS. The continuing existence of the PFO and FCO positions perpetuates confusion at all levels—federal, state, local—and indeed reflects the larger DHS-FEMA bureaucratic battle. It is time for this battle to end. As the relationship between DHS and FEMA is restructured, the PFO and FCO positions should be eliminated in the National Response Framework and in statute, respectively, and replaced with a single position: Lead Federal Coordinator (LFC). In practice the LFCs should typically be very senior officials in each of the 10 FEMA regional offices and they should have the authorities of the FCO as described in the Stafford Act of 1988. Ensuring that there is a single DHS senior official on the ground during a crisis—who reports through the Secretary to the President, who has the power to coordinate and distribute federal assistance (whether directly or through delegation of authority), and who already knows the state and local players—would greatly increase unity of effort.

■ State clearly that the Department of Defense will not have the lead in responding to catastrophic incidents but will be expected to play a substantial support role when needed.

The persistent debate about whether the Department of Defense (DoD) should ever lead the response to a catastrophe instead of DHS should be settled. The next Administration should restate emphatically that DHS will be the Lead Federal Coordinator during domestic incidents, but should also make clear that DoD will be expected to play a significant supporting role in catastrophes, working within the HSPD-5 framework. As outlined in the National Response Framework, the federal government should have a single, scalable framework for incident management, led by a single federal agency. The nation cannot afford to have one system for 98 percent of all events, and a different, DoD-led system for the 2 percent of events that are “high end.” At the same time, the next Administration should make very clear that DoD will no longer hold the civil support mission at arm’s length and will be expected to play a very significant supporting role in the aftermath of a catastrophic event—a role that will require that DoD resource, train, and equip its forces accordingly.

■ Initiate a robust dialogue on the subject of how to balance the need to enable the federal government to directly employ federal resources within a state or states during the most extreme circumstances with the constitutional rights of states.

The idea of expanding the role of the federal government during a domestic catastrophe is anathema to many in the homeland security community; but in light of the threats faced by the nation in the post–September 11 environment, it is only prudent to ensure that the country’s preparedness system includes the ability of the federal government to exercise its full authority under the law to save lives and protect property during a major disaster. It is not impossible to imagine scenarios in which state leadership is severely weakened in its ability to orchestrate an effective response effort, or others in which the state leadership is in place but the state’s capacity to execute decisions made by those leaders is severely degraded. In such instances, it may be appropriate for the federal government to exercise the authority granted to it under the Stafford Act more fully than is envisioned today.

The goal of adapting the current system is not to enable the federal government to “take over” management of a catastrophe over the objections of a state governor, but rather to develop an understanding with state governors in advance about the conditions under which the federal government might need to directly employ federal resources within a state or states in the most extreme circumstances in order to execute its responsibility to save lives and protect property. The principle of managing a crisis at the lowest level of government possible should remain a fundamental feature of the American approach to domestic emergency management. At the same time, the next Secretary of Homeland Security, with the President’s strong backing, should work closely with state governors to begin exploring how the current system could be adapted in a mutually acceptable way that balances the need to fully empower the federal government under existing law with maintenance of the constitutional right of states to self-governance during a catastrophe.

■ Conduct a Quadrennial National Security Review and create a National Security Planning Guidance.

There is growing consensus that the federal government needs a mechanism to develop an inte- grated set of national security priorities, assess trade-offs among these different priorities, and assign roles and responsibilities for these priorities across the interagency. To achieve these objectives, the next Administration should direct the National Security Council (NSC) to lead a Quadrennial National Security Review (QNSR) in the first few months of the new term. The review would engage the relevant national security agencies, focus on a select set of critical national security priorities, and produce two major documents: an integrated National Security Planning Guidance and a public National Security Strategy, both of which would include treatment of homeland security issues. The National Security Planning Guidance would elaborate on the broad priorities articulated in the QNSR; provide more specific guidance on priorities, roles, and missions; and lay out timelines for the implementation of major planning objectives. In addition, the planning guidance would be the starting point for Cabinet agencies to develop their own more detailed strategies.

■ Create a Senior Director for Strategic Planning within the merged NSC to lead interagency strategic planning efforts and oversee their implementation.

The federal government cannot develop or implement the kinds of integrated national security strategies and programs that are needed to meet the challenges of the 21st-century security environment in the absence of strong leadership and coordination at the White House level. As part of the NSC, the next President should create and empower a robust strategic planning directorate, led by a Senior Director for Strategic Planning. Rather than relying on the 1- to 2-person strategic planning offices that have sometimes been a part of the NSC organization, the next President and National Security Adviser need at least 10–15 people leading strategic planning efforts on a daily basis. This office should be responsible for leading the QNSR and developing the National Secu- rity Planning Guidance. This office also should be responsible for guiding the interagency process to develop detailed plans for responding to catastrophic events, as well as the associated effort to develop requirements for catastrophe response at the federal level that are then fed into the federal budget process.

■ Establish a robust interagency organization overseen by the NSC but housed at DHS that is responsible for the development of integrated and detailed interagency plans and for identification of specific requirements for the federal departments.

Although considerable progress has been made in 2007 and 2008, the federal government still does not have a set of detailed interagency plans associated with the 15 National Planning Sce- narios. The next Administration should establish a strong interagency organization—closely overseen by the NSC Strategic Planning Directorate but housed at DHS—that is responsible on a daily basis for developing integrated, interagency operational plans for responding to catastrophic events. These plans would be updated regularly, perhaps every year or two. Creating such plans is one of the most important steps that the federal government can take to improve national readiness, and the interagency organization should be backed strongly by the NSC, should be staffed with the best possible personnel with planning expertise, and should be high on the radar screen of the next Secretary of Homeland Security. Complementing its deliberate planning function, it should be focal point for identifying specific requirements for federal departments, which are then validated by the relevant agencies and fed into their internal resourcing systems.

■ Create a partnership between the Office of Management and Budget and the NSC Strategic Planning Directorate to lead the development of integrated budget planning across homeland security mission areas.

To more fully integrate the implementation of homeland security policy, the next Administration should develop a partnership between the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the NSC Strategic Planning Directorate charged with devising a method of examining budgets across homeland security mission areas. This process should entail a front-end review of agency budget proposals in the planning stages, across mission areas and programs to identify priorities, capability gaps, overlaps, and shortfalls at the outset of the budget cycle. This partnership will require that NSC and OMB begin reviewing the agency budget plans together over the course of the summer before the President’s budget is submitted. The final budget submission to Congress could then include proposals presented not only by mission area but also by major programs that support the mission requirements. Participating NSC staff, taking the lead role, should be drawn mainly from the Strategic Planning Directorate but should also include other members of the NSC staff with deep knowledge of the particular subject matter areas. To facilitate this integrated review across mission areas, a new OMB staff group with significant policy expertise and cross-agency purview should be developed and should play a major role in the process.

■ Substantially revise the Target Capabilities List.

The federal government has directed state and local governments today to focus their preparedness investments on 37 target capabilities, but the target capability levels do not differentiate between big cities, smaller cities, small towns, and rural areas. Nor is there very clear guidance on how to measure whether state and local jurisdictions have achieved the prescribed target capability levels. The next Secretary of Homeland Security and FEMA Administrator should build on work that is just getting under way in FEMA to substantially revise the Target Capabilities List (TCL) so that desired target capabilities levels are linked to different types of jurisdictions and the guidelines provided differentiate between cities and towns around the country in terms of area, population size and density, numbers of potential high-risk targets, and other factors.

This effort should also clearly describe performance objectives for target capabilities in commonsense terms, linking those objectives to the particular needs of different sizes and types of jurisdictions. Equally important, a revised TCL will specify how progress toward those objectives will be judged. Once the objectives and evaluative measures are developed, DHS and state and local governments will have an agreed-on basis for assessing capability development, something that does not exist today. Particularly in light of the great dissatisfaction expressed by many state and local officials with the consultation process for the original TCL, published as part of the National Preparedness Guidelines, it is critically important that FEMA to adopt a truly collaborative process in undertaking this revision.

■ Reform the DHS grants program to be a flagship component of DHS that is well managed, transparent, highly credible, and tightly linked to federal priorities.

The DHS grants program and the organization within the department that administers the program will inevitably be crucial to DHS’s success in building preparedness at the state and local levels. Recognizing that the grants program and its administration contribute strongly to how DHS is viewed beyond the Beltway, the next Secretary and FEMA Administrator should make reforming the grant program a high priority. The FEMA regional offices should become in effect the front lines of the grant program process, as they are much closer to the state and local grant recipients than is DHS headquarters in Washington. Central to the reform effort should be linking the grant program more tightly to the strategic priorities outlined in policy guidance documents such as the Guidelines and a revised Target Capabilities List. Grant applications should explain how proposed investments will achieve target capability levels, grant recipients should report progress toward target capabilities using agreed-on evaluative measures contained in a revised TCL, and federal evaluations should be undertaken in addition to the self-assessment process, perhaps as a condition of grant eligibility.

■ Host a catastrophic event tabletop exercise for very senior officials early in each new Administration.

The new Administration should bring together its Cabinet officials for a tabletop exercise focused on managing a catastrophic event in the first 60 days of the new term. Such an exercise would force Cabinet officials to become familiar with their basic homeland security responsibilities and would give them all a better understanding of the scope and type of challenges the federal gov- ernment would likely face should some catastrophe occur. This kind of exercise also would help spur Cabinet Secretaries toward focusing their agencies on critical vulnerabilities early in the next Administration.

■ Reform TOPOFF to make it much closer to a “no-notice” exercise.

Because it involves extensive advance coordination, TOPOFF—the “top officials” capstone exercise—may not offer sufficient insight into the nation’s overall preparedness for catastrophic events. Only an exercise that is “no-notice,” or close to it, will provide an accurate picture of how well the federal government can coordinate its own efforts internally and work collaboratively with state and local governments as it responds to a catastrophe. Given the practical challenges associated with major field exercises, it may be useful to focus initially on holding no-notice tabletop exer- cises at the federal and state government level to test decisionmaking and coordination processes before determining whether it is possible to proceed to a full-fledged no-notice field exercise.

■ Complete and expand the existing effort to create homeland security regional hubs that leverage the resources of the FEMA regional offices.

Common sense dictates that leaders in Washington, D.C., cannot directly manage the response to a catastrophe taking place hundreds or thousands of miles away. FEMA’s recent initiatives to rein- vigorate its regional offices and make them the essential link between Washington and the field are critical and must be fully implemented. Without this connective tissue between Washington and the state and local levels, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to realize any meaningful vision of national preparedness. The FEMA regional offices should be responsible for developing regional strategies and plans, functioning as a one-stop shop for preparedness activities and the grant programs, and building on existing regional collaborative structures. To ensure that the regional offices can be fully effective, the next Administration should establish requirements making them the principal coordinators for federal agencies in the field. Finally, a very senior official in each regional office with bureaucratic, operational, and “Washington” skills should be predesignated as the Lead Federal Coordinator for each region.

■ Create regional homeland security task forces, drawn largely from existing National Guard units, to complement the regional homeland security hubs.

Creating regional homeland security task forces from existing National Guard units would provide a military complement to the FEMA regional offices. The next Secretary of Defense and Chief of the National Guard Bureau should work closely with governors and U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) to organize National Guard–led homeland security task forces in each region. Not only would these task forces create a focal point for regional military planning, exercising, and training, they would ensure that each region of the country has a rapid response force able to help bridge the three- to five-day gap between the immediate aftermath of an event, when local first responders are the only capabilities on the scene, and the arrival of most federal capabilities.

■ Implement and fund a strengthened version of the National Security Professional Program and fund and implement an expanded DHS professional development and education system.

The next Administration needs to beef up the requirements in the National Security Professional Program and provide additional resources for implementing Executive Order 13434, which created it. Without a workforce that has the skills and experience to operate across all the dimensions of homeland security—prevention, protection, preparedness, response, and recovery—the nation will not be able to protect itself against future catastrophes or manage them when they do happen. Rotation through different positions in the government to gain core competencies needs to be linked explicitly to eligibility for career advancement, as it was for uniformed military officers as part of the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols Act.

Ideally, the professional development and education program envisioned in the executive order would also include opportunities for state- and local-level personnel to serve in the federal government. To support these rotational assignments and build a robust system of training and professional education, the next Administration should work with Congress to mandate that participating agencies fund a 3–5 percent personnel float. Complementing professional development at the interagency level, the next Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that the DHS Learning and Development Strategy is appropriately funded and implemented, expand current education and development plans, and engage institutions of higher learning in a dialogue about future needs for homeland security professionals.

[Dig]

Any chance we will see this kind of uprising nationwide in the U.S., the U.K., Italy, Germany or France or are our people too asleep to go on the streets and fight for their rights and oust their leaders and governments?

We are fighting for our rights, peacefully, to protect the constitutional government from this planned "revolution" which is what they want.

You think the banks are bad now? Wait till you see them implement what they tried to do during the Civil War.

Watch "Secret of Oz" for more info.

[NWOSCUM]

[shipgeek]

The PTB are going to recuperate the uprising to propel El Baradei and make him look like the good guy. Elections will be organized and he will become the new leader in replacement for Mubarak. Food will still be as costly, the poor will be just as poor or maybe worse, the rich will still be rich, the opposition will have no right of speech and it will be the same thing all over, only under a different leader - another manipulated puppet.

[bigron]

Egypt Nobel laureate ElBaradei under house arrest


Share  AP foreign, Friday January 28 2011 SARAH EL DEEB

Associated Press= CAIRO (AP) — Egyptian security officials say police have put Nobel Peace laureate Mohamed ElBaradei under house arrest. Police stationed outside his suburban Cairo home told him he cannot leave the house after he joined tens of thousands of protesters in the capital Friday.

ElBaradei returned to the country Thursday night from a month abroad and declared he was ready to lead the protesters to a regime change.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below

CONTINUE READING

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/9473769