|The Fake ICC and the Globalist Strategy of Tension - Saturday, May 28, 2011|
Tony Cartalucci | Fake globalist-funded court using fake evidence from fake globalist-funded NGOs.
read more ...
May 28, 2011
Bangkok, Thailand May 28, 2011 – Russia’s President Medvedev, according to the Australian, has “endorsed calls for Colonel Gaddafi to leave office and offered to help to negotiate his exit. ” It is a move that has “surprised and delighted” both London and Washington after Russia’s initial protest against the extralegal military action that was executed upon an Iraq War-style pack of lies.
This apparent backpedaling by Russia coincides with increased bombardments of Libya’s capital of Tripoli and calls by France and Britain to send in helicopter gunships in an effort to increase the level of murder and mayhem in order to force the Libyan government to meet “concessions.” The contrived globalist International Criminal Court (ICC), has also attempted to place pressure upon Libya through an “arrest warrant” targeting Qaddafi.
An Entirely Fake Court
The “arrest warrant” issued by the ICC is based on evidence acquired from “30 missions to 11 States, and through interviews with a large number of persons, including key insiders and eyewitnesses.” The ICC itself notes that the “unprecedented cooperation” it has received has come from “States and organizations, none of which are currently working in Libya.” Undeterred by their admittedly tenuous investigation, they go on to provide an enumerated list of their “evidence.”
A look over this “evidence” presented by the “Office of the Prosecutor” reveals an amateurish, almost desperate attempt aimed at the Libyan leader. The entire basis of the “Prosecutor’s” case is built upon reports taken from BBC, AlJazeera, the London Guardian, New York Times, the US State Department’s Broadcasting Board of Governors-run Voice of America, the globalist-funded Human Rights Rights Watch, and the National Endowment for Democracy and Tides Foundation-funded International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), among many, many others.
Perhaps depending entirely on their self-appointed authority, slick logo, tall headquarters, and official looking website, the ICC hopes no one actually looks at the “evidence” or realizes that the same corporate-financier interests are the driving forces behind both the fake ICC and the fake NGOs and corporate-funded media organizations that have supplied it with “evidence.” It should be noted that even the BBC, along with AlJazeera and many other corporate-funded media organizations have conceded, albeit buried deeply within their reports on both Libya and Syria, that their sources cannot be verified as it is based on 2nd information conveyed via “activist groups.” It should also be noted that the “Arab Spring’s” opposition and these “activist groups” are also globalist-funded.
The International Criminal Court itself claims to be, “an independent, permanent court that investigates and prosecutes persons accused of the most serious crimes of international concern, namely genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.” A visit to the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC) site reveals just who is behind the ICC, who is actively promoting it and networking with the ICC’s various NGO partners, and the fact that all involved boast the same financial and political supporters.
The CICC claims to include, “2,500 civil society organizations in 150 different countries working in partnership to strengthen international cooperation with the ICC; ensure that the Court is fair, effective and independent; make justice both visible and universal; and advance stronger national laws that deliver justice to victims of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.” The CICC however, also is “deeply appreciative of the generous support” provided by the European Union, the Ford Foundation, the Fortune 500-lined John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, George Soros’ Open Society Institute, and Humanity United.
Humanity United in turn boast partnerships with the globalist co-conspirators of BBC World Service Trust, NED/Open Society/US State Department-funded Benetech, George Soros’ Open Society Institute, and the NED-funded Solidarity Center which mobilized Egypt’s labor unions just as the US-stoked unrest began to falter. These “generous supporters” are literally the same organizations that have built up the very “civil society organizations” the CICC is “working in partnership” with.
In other words, fake globalist-funded civil society organizations form a fake globalist-funded coalition, which in turn are supplying a fake globalist-funded court with evidence to further what is entirely a self-serving, politically motivated agenda using “humanity” as a mere and increasingly flimsy pretense. It is an entire network contrived out of thin air with fiat currency, and lent legitimacy by the myriad of corporate-financier owned media operations, such as BBC, AlJazeera, CNN, Fox News, VOA, and the myriad of other “sources” cited by the ICC’s “Prosecutor’s Office” in regards to Libya.
Indeed, the “International Criminal Court” is entirely fake, created by perhaps the most egregious criminals ever to have walked the earth, not to ensure “justice” in any sense we are familiar with, but to augment the self-proclaimed authority and legitimacy the global elite insist we are all beholden to. We are not beholden to it, not by any stretch of the imagination, nor are we beholden to any other contrivance operating in the name of “international arbiter.” We have our local, state/provincial governments, within the nation-state. What appears beyond the nation-state are self-serving, multi-national corporate-financier conglomerations that transcend boarders, usurp national sovereignty and authority, and betray any sense of our innate, inalienable individual sovereignty by insisting their “international institutions” supersede all that falls beneath them.
Climbing out of the Globalist Strategy of Tension
Sovereignty and indeed the future of free humanity depends on our individual reassertion of our rights and responsibilities to sustain ourselves, our communities, our states/provinces, and our nation-states. We cannot depend on the Russians or the Chinese to act as the counterbalance to the global-elite because the Russians and the Chinese, through their participation in the IMF, the United Nations, and even the International Criminal Court – all entirely contrived by the global elite – for whatever reason, have fallen directly into a “strategy of tension.” Russia’s latest flip-flop regarding Libya defies the hopes of those who saw the nation as a dependable counterbalance. Russia’s actions now serve to grant the globalist-praising, terrorist usurpers of Libya’s rebellion an entire nation to despoil on behalf of Washington and London – perhaps even Moscow now, based on some behind-the-scenes deal.
By participating in these illegitimate “international institutions” the nation-states we live under are granting the transnational elite legitimacy they would otherwise not have. It is impossible to discern whether the Russians or Chinese are participating in such farcical “international institutions” as part of a Machiavellian strategy, hidden complicity to an emerging global government, or for short-sighted, self-serving interests.
What we can be sure of is our own commitment to our own interests and agenda on a local, county, and state/provincial level. Thus, we the people, be we Americans, Russians, or Chinese, must ourselves act as the counterbalance to the global-elite’s unwarranted influence. Balking the Anglo-American corporate-financier oligarchs does not guarantee other oligarchs will not rise and take their place elsewhere. Only by committing to a new paradigm of local sovereignty, where state/provincial, and national power is beholden to self-sufficient people on a local level instead of multi-national corporations on a global level, do we end entirely the threat of any sort of global-elite lording over us.
Sun Tzu in the “Art of War” once said, “therefore the clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy’s will to be imposed on him.” The ideal scenario for the globalists is for us to continue responding to their provocations on their terms. And whether we agree or disagree with their agenda, as long as we use their contrived institutions to contest them – we continue granting them more legitimacy regardless of the outcome of our protests. This is the ultimate strategy of tension, playing out daily on a global level, ensnaring well-intentioned but ignorant servants of the globalist agenda, as well as informed proponents of freedom and sovereignty alike.
By turning our backs entirely on the global-elite’s institutions, their ploys, their causes, their wars, and their false political dichotomies, and instead imposing our own will, on a local level, cutting off entirely the source of the global-elite’s power (our complicity), we force them to react to the imposition of our own will. The Tenth Amendment movement is the very embodiment of this in modern day practice, with the “Food Sovereignty” movement and now Texas’ battle against the TSA’s usurpation of state and local law enforcement in their airports taking the front line. Regular Americans from across the country are leaving the corporate-pundit guided debates and taking action, guided not by some political agenda, but rather their own innate sovereignty.It starts with something as simple as planting your own garden, the piecemeal boycotting and replacement of all multi-national corporations, participation in our local government and the growing alternative media, and it results in the seizure of the unwarranted influence that has allowed a group of criminal international bankers to contrive their own international army, an international court, and the ability to wage war against entire nation-states with absolute impunity.
|Israel Attacks Humanitarian Ship to Gaza in International Waters - Wednesday, May 18, 2011|
Global Research has been in contact with the Spirit of Rachel Corrie, a Malaysian ship carrying a humanitarian aid cargo to Gaza, which has been attacked in international waters by Israel.
read more ...
The vessel left the Port of Piraeus, Greece on Wednesday, May 11 carrying 7.5 kilometers of UPVC (plastic) sewage pipes to help restore the devastated sewerage system in Gaza. The humanitarian initiative is sponsored by Perdana Global Peace Foundation (PGPF) and participating in this mission includes anti-war activists and journalists, consisting of 7 Malaysians, 2 Irish, 2 Indians and 1 Canadian.
|The “International Criminal Court”: Prosecuting Gaddafi With Questionable Evidence - Wednesday, May 18, 2011|
The International Criminal Court has requested an arrest warrant for Colonel Gaddafi and his sons for “crimes against humanity”, accusing them of ordering, planning and participating in illegal attacks on civilians.
May 18, 2011
The International Criminal Court has requested an arrest warrant for Colonel Gaddafi and his sons for “crimes against humanity”, accusing them of ordering, planning and participating in illegal attacks on civilians. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, International Criminal Court Prosecutor, said, “Based on the evidence collected, the prosecution has applied to pre-trial chamber one for the issuance of arrest warrants against Moammar Muhamad abu Minyar Gaddafi, Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah al-Sanoussi.”
But what is the evidence? The press release on the website of the International Criminal Court makes frequent reference to “direct evidence” but fails to cite any of this evidence in detail. In order to try and clarify the grounds for the prosecution, I emailed the ICC:
I’m looking into the ICC Prosecutor allegations of war crimes against Col. Gaddafi and his sons and am struggling to find the evidence on which these accusations are based. Referring to the press release issued on 16th May 2011 (http://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/exeres/1365E3B7-8152-4456-942C-A5CD5A51E829.htm) there is frequent reference to “direct evidence” obtained by the ICC but nothing in the way of the actual evidence itself. Can you point me to a comprehensive analysis of this evidence so I can refer to it in my article?
A secondary point of which you could be assistance relates to the following passage: “The Office will further investigate allegations of massive rapes, war crimes committed by different parties during the armed conflict that started at the end of February, and attacks against sub-Saharan Africans wrongly perceived to be mercenaries” Given that some of the parties involved in these rapes and attacks against sub-Saharan Africans were armed and funded by Western powers via their proxies in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, will NATO-affiliated forces also be under investigation for their part in these atrocities? Are NATO forces being investigated for the deaths of civilians as a consequence of Operation Mass Appeal, in addition to covert actions carried out by special operations forces prior to the NATO-led bombing campaign?
I look forward to your response and clarification.
The ICC promptly responded, providing me with a document entitled, PUBLIC REDACTED Version Prosecutor’s Application Pursuant to Article 58 as to Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar GADDAFI, Saif Al‐Islam GADDAFI and Abdullah AL‐SENUSSI.
Needless to say, “redacted” is the operative word.
Sources backing up the frequent assertions in the document regarding crimes against humanity carried out by Gaddafi and his sons are notable by their absence. For example, the document states, “In the early days of the demonstrations, GADDAFI transmitted orders through his Secretariat to “discipline” civilians, by killing them and destroying their property, who had openly rebelled against the regime. Further, AL‐SENUSSI, upon GADDAFI’s instructions, directed and coordinated the operation of the Security Forces in Benghazi and expressly ordered the shooting at civilians. Demonstrators were attacked by members of the Security Forces who opened machine gun fire on them in different areas of the city, such as the Juliyana bridge and Jamal Abdun Naser Street.” The sources for these alleged transmissions and subsequent attacks are not provided. Further, the report uses vague generalisations concerning the history of Libya in an attempt to bolster its case. “Direct evidence of the plan to use extreme and lethal violence is corroborated by the scale, scope and duration of the attacks; the pattern of the attacks in various cities; the speeches and statements of GADDAFI, SAIF AL‐ISLAM and AL‐SENUSSI; the history of the regime’s response to any political opposition within Libya; and the complete authority exercised by GADDAFI and his subordinates over all important security decisions.” Again, the “direct evidence” is not sourced, while appealing to a state’s prior human rights record is not proof by any measure of the current crimes of which they stand accused.
The report continues, stating, “On 20 February, SAIF AL‐ISLAM spoke on Libyan state television, refusing to recognize the Libyans’ demands, blaming the unrest on “foreign agents” and threatening the country with a “civil warʺ “worse than Iraq and worse than in Yugoslavia” that would cause “thousands of deaths”. No mention is made of the presence of the SAS and CIA in the country prior to this point, validating the claim that “foreign agents” were in fact involved in the unrest. Nor does the report concede the rather obvious point that a “civil war” cannot by definition be waged without more than one party, thus implicating forces backed by foreign powers in the “thousands of deaths” that Saif Al-Islam hinted might follow.
The document again makes the claim that Gaddafi opened fire on peaceful protestors without providing any sources for this claim, stating, “During that night, massive demonstrations against GADDAFI took place in different areas of Tripoli after the sunset prayers. GADDAFIʹs Security Forces opened fire as soon as they met groups of peaceful demonstrators that were walking towards the Green Square. Similar incidents were replicated throughout the day mainly in the areas of the Green Square and city center, Mojam’a Al‐Mahakem Court compound and Al‐Dribi. The protesters set on fire government buildings, including the General People’s Congress, and at least one police station and one ministry.” The report provides no video, photographic or any other evidence for these assertions. Perhaps the following point is intended to provide such evidence: “On 22 February GADDAFI spoke on State television from his headquarters in Bab Al‐Azizia, Tripoli. He refused to acknowledge any legitimacy of the demonstrators’ demands and did not regret the crimes committed by his Security Forces. On the contrary, GADDAFI called the protesters ʺratsʺ, “garbage” and “mercenaries” and threatened “to clean Libya inch by inch, house by house, small street by small street, individual by individual, corner by corner until the country is clean from all garbage and dirt”.” Clearly, threatening such actions is not proof by any measure that such actions were indeed carried out – if that were the case, one must present a prosecution for war crimes against the State of Israel, since shortly before Operation Cast Lead the deputy defence minister Matan Vilnai threatened a “shoah”. The slaughter that followed proved that this was no empty threat – yet the ICC has made no effort to present a case for prosection against Israel for the killing of Gazan civilians, which included over 300 children in the death toll.
The report continues with more unsupported assertions, stating, “On 25 February, Friday, one week after the beginning of the attacks and a day of prayer for the Muslim community, GADDAFI issued further instructions to attack civilians. He learned that demonstrations were scheduled that day after the prayers and instructed the deployment of Security Forces throughout the city. Snipers strategically placed awaited the crowds to leave the mosques. Multiple sources describe how civilians were shot at throughout the city when they were pouring from the mosques after the prayers. On this day alone GADDAFI’s forces killed up to one‐hundred civilians in Tripoli in the areas of Green Square, Souq al‐Jomaa, Arada, Zawyet al dahmani, Tajoura and Fashloom, among others.” Despite refering to “multiple sources” not a single one of these is cited.
The document then continues. “In sum, the evidence demonstrates that GADDAFI conceived a plan to quell the popular demonstrations of February 2011 by all means, including through the use of extreme and lethal violence.” Unfortunately, as appears to be self-evident from the frequent unsourced assertions combined with the proliferation of redactions throughout the document, it is perhaps fair to conclude the there is very little evidence to demonstrate the central claims of the International Criminal Court’s prosecution against Colonel Gaddafi and his sons. This is perhaps best highlighted on page 17 of the document: (http://nifcrimes.com/Libya_redacted.pdf)
E. SUMMARY OF THE EVIDENCE AND OTHER INFORMATION ESTABLISHING REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT MUAMMAR MOHAMMED ABU MINYAR GADDAFI, SAIF ALISLAM GADDAFI AND ABDULLAH AL‐SENUSSI COMMITTED CRIMES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 58(2)(d) OF THE ROME STATUTE1. REDACTED
Following on from this I emailed the ICC once again:
Many thanks – it would seem that the evidence is flimsy and circumstantial at best (that is, the evidence that hasn’t been redacted) – most of the key claims (use of snipers against civilians etc) appear to be completely lacking sources. Will a version of this be released for public consumption without the redactions?
Can you respond to my second point with regards to prosecuting NATO forces for civilian deaths/attacks on hospitals and civilian infrastructure and the repeated use of depleted uranium? Also, is a case going to be brought against Israel for the recent killing of protestors as well as the attack on the humanitarian ship Spirit of Rachel Corrie in international waters?
The evidence for these crimes against humanity is certainly overwhelming in comparison to the evidence provided by the ICC in their case against Gaddafi, yet the ICC has remained steadfastly silent when it comes to the crimes committed by NATO and Israeli forces, both recent and historical. The crimes of which Gaddafi and his sons are accused by the ICC may indeed have occurred, although the paucity of evidence provided – at least, in the redacted public version cited above – seems to cast some doubts on this. No conclusive video or photographic evidence has been provided by either the ICC or the mainstream media who have made similar accusations. If it existed, there is little doubt that it would have been broadcast to the world constantly across the news channels.
Contrast this with the strong evidence of war crimes committed by Western powers such as the US, UK and Israel, and the corresponding absence of prosecutions against these nations by the ICC, and it seems fair to say that the institution has a conception of justice which appears to be one-sided at best.
read more ...
|Globalists Fueling Unrest in Thailand - Wednesday, May 18, 2011|
Thailand’s opposition party is led by long-time globalist conspirator Thaksin Shinwatra, a former adviser to the Carlyle Group, who was literally standing in front of the CFR in NYC on the eve of his ousting from power in 2006.
Same organizations, same rhetoric, same globalist agenda, different country
May 18, 2011
Bangkok, Thailand – In Egypt before the January 2011 globalist-funded mobs took to the streets destabilizing the country and making way for Mohamed ElBaradei to worm his way into power, he spent the preceding year building up his street mobs and his political front, while his globalist sponsors began setting the rhetorical stage. Under the radar of most of the world, ElBaradei and his “National Front for Change” had all the ingredients of a festering foreign-backed color revolution. His membership upon the globalist International Crisis Group should have been a warning to all geopolitical analysts, and was a feature overlooked by many even after the color revolution was well underway from January onward. What if the alternative media noticed and began reporting on this nefarious gambit a year, or even months before the “Arab Spring” unfolded?
Perhaps Egypt was a missed opportunity to expose and thus balk the globalist agenda. However, highly contested elections are preceding the next phase of yet another globalist-fueled gambit, this time in Southeast Asia’s Thailand. It bears all the hallmarks of ElBaradei’s disingenuous campaign and run-up to the color revolution in Egypt. With the facts in hand, there is a possibility to raise awareness, get ahead of and balk yet another wave of globalist-sponsored geopolitical destabilization.
Thailand’s opposition party is led by long-time globalist conspirator Thaksin Shinwatra, a former adviser to the Carlyle Group, who was literally standing in front of the CFR in NYC on the eve of his ousting from power in 2006. Since then, he has been represented by some of the largest lobbying firms on earth, including fellow Carlyle man James Baker and his Baker Botts law firm, the International Crisis Group’s Kenneth Adelman and his Edelman Public Relations firm (also a corporate sponsor of the “color revolution college” Movements.org), and Belfer Center adviser and IISS trustee Robert Blackwill of Barbour Griffith & Rogers.
Long-time globalist minion Thaksin Shinawatra is shown here during his September 18, 2006 talk before the Council on Foreign Relations
in New York City. The next day the Thai military would depose his government from power in a bloodless coup. With the help of the globalists’ vast networks he has divided and destabilized Thailand ever since.
Currently, Thaksin is represented by Robert Amsterdam of Amsterdam & Peroff, a major corporate member of the globalist Chatham House. Robert Amsterdam is concurrently defending Thaksin’s “red shirt” street mob as well as the imprisoned Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Khodorkovsky attempted to consolidate and handover Russia’s resources to foreign bankers, most notably Jacob Rothschild who was sitting as a board member within his Soros-style “Open Russia Foundation.”
Thaksin himself had attempted a similar consolidation and hand-over, including a foiled 2004 US-Thai FTA that he tried to pass without parliamentary approval. Many of the corporations that stood to gain from the US-Thai FTA (listed here on page 8) are also involved in the many groups not only still supporting Thaksin’s bid for power today, but engaged in a global agenda pursuing military and economic hegemony.
Color Revolution: Years in the Making
For two consecutive years Thaksin, his globalist backers, his proxy political party, and his “red shirt” street mobs have attempted to oust the current government with increasingly violent “people’s revolutions.” In 2009, riots broke out as Thaksin phoned in from his Dubai resort proclaiming, “now that they have tanks on the streets, it is time for the people to come out in revolution, and when it is necessary, I will come back to the country.” The rioters would gun down two Bangkok residents before the Thai army was able to disperse the protests.
read more ...
Jakropob Penkair (left) and Jatuporn Prompan (right) are two long-time associates of the globalist Thaksin Shinawatra. Jakropob had declared in 2009 the beginning of a suspiciously Communist-sounding “People’s War.” Jakropob is assumed to be hiding in Cambodia, while Jatuporn is currently residing in jail on terrorism-related charges for his role in leading last year’s deadly riots.
In the lull between April 2009 and April 2010, Thaksin’s former political spokesman and co-leader of the “red shirt” mobs, Jakropob Penkair would lay to rest any doubts that the movement was not only foreign-funded, but that foreign support made up the bulk of financial and political aid the movement was receiving. In a July 2010 interview with Australia Broadcasting Corporation’s (ABC) “Lateline,” titled, “Red Shirts now coordinated from outside Thailand: Senior Red Shirts figure Jakropob Penkair says international donors are now funding the campaign for a change of Thai government,” Jakropob would explain:
JAKROPOB PENKAIR: The confronting issue is that how the movement would get its support. And in the past year it proves that its support could come from elsewhere. It doesn’t have to come from Kun Thaksin and his family or his assigned people.
ZOE DANIEL: Are you talking money now?
JAKROPOB PENKAIR: Talking money, talking about the safe place to stay, talking about the co-operation of respective government in the countries that we visit or stay – all those things.
We have been receiving, in a more natural way than before – in other words, we have had such a controlled system before, and then it’s quite a relief to see that in the past year, there are a lot more universal support too of course, but we have the duty to make it clearer to the people out there, especially foreigners.
ZOE DANIEL: So, you’re saying that others are donating financially to the cause to keep you going?
JAKROPOB PENKAIR: Yes. Yes, they have.
ZOE DANIEL: Internationally as well as Thais?
JAKROPOB PENKAIR: Especially internationally.
After the contrived “Arab Spring,” the 30 years of armed insurrection in Libya now re-branded as a peaceful, spontaneous pro-democracy revolution, and considering the laundry list of globalists backing Thaksin since 2006, Jakropob’s words are all too familiar and indicative of yet another globalist gambit unfolding in yet another sovereign nation.
Jakropob would go on to say in a separate interview that a “people’s war” had begun. Other sources claimed that small-arms have been moved into Thailand from Cambodia for increasingly violent operations. On April 10, 2010, these threats would be made good on, as militant groups came out to balk army efforts to once again disperse the protesters, killing 7 soldiers in one night, including an army colonel, and tipping off a month of sporadic gun battles and grenade attacks.
After initial denials that the protesters were involved in armed violence, the international spokesman for the “red” protesters, Sean Boonpracong, admitted to Reuters that elements of the army were with their movement, including the black-clad mystery gunmen that took part in the April 10 bloodbath. The suspected leader of these gunmen, renegade general Khattiya Sawasdipol, known as “Seh Daeng,” admitted to commanding 300 armed men trained for ”close encounters” and carrying M79 grenade launchers, before withdrawing his comment in later interviews.
From April 10, 2010 until the widespread arson that marked the end of the protests on May 19, 2010, daily and nightly gun battles, grenade attacks, and sniper fire would claim the lives of 91 people. This included 9 soldiers and police, a woman killed by an M79 grenade attack, and at least one protester who died of smoke inhalation while looting a building fellow protesters lit ablaze. The remaining 80 deaths included journalists, bystanders, medical workers, and protesters caught in the crossfire. While protester to this day attempt to portray these events as a massacre of “91 protesters,” it is quite clear that the military was up against an armed wing working amongst the protesters, admitted by members of the protest leadership themselves.
Widespread protests were headed-off this year with the call for fresh elections in July 2011. However, it is more than likely Thaksin and his proxies will not be allowed to seize back power, and the cycle of violence will ensue, complete with increasing international support on Thaksin’s behalf.
What Sort of International Support?
The now notorious National Endowment for Democracy and Freedom House organizations, implicated for their involvement in orchestrating the “Arab Spring,” along with the International Crisis Group have all contributed to the “red” color revolution in Thailand as well. Just as they have in Egypt, Syria, Libya, and Belarus, these nefarious organizations have leveraged an incredibly disingenuous concern for “human rights,” “democracy,” and “freedom” to pressure the Thai government internationally as Thaksin’s political proxies and street mobs pressure the government from within the nation.
Suspicious signs repeating almost verbatim calls made by overtly foreign-funded movements in Egypt, Libya, and Syria. “UN Help Us Bring Justice to Thailand,” “World Power Please Take a Look at Thailand Without Democracy,” and “We Need International Democracy.”
These organizations, along with Human Rights Watch and a myriad of other “international arbiters” supply a steady stream of metrics to be cited by Thaksin’s political agents and propaganda machines on the ground. They are also used by the globalists’ corporate-owned media to muddy Thailand’s international image, opening the door for potentially more overt interventions as seen in nations like Libya, Syria, and Iran.
Often cited is the Freedom House’s “Freedom in the World” report where Thailand was downgraded from free under the globalist-friendly cleptocratic Thaksin regime, to partly free under the current Thai government who has been steadily distancing itself from free-trade with the US, ignoring US calls to enforce “intellectual property,” and pursuing a more protectionist policy in regards to the West and its unraveling economy.
What those who cite Freedom House forget to mention is that upon its board of trustees sits Kenneth Adelman who was Thaksin’s former paid lobbyist. Such a conflict of interest derides Freedom House’s legitimacy entirely, and similar personalities and corporate sponsors involved in the organization have also directly benefited financially from conflicts started on lies given legitimacy through Freedom House’s “work.” These include both George Soros and many of the signatories of the war mongering Project for a New American Century.
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED), is on-record funding “Prachatai,” a Thai propaganda outlet promoting a variety globalist agendas, linking to sites such as Soros-funded “Open Democracy,” Soros and Ford Foundation funded “Global Voices,” the globalist International Institute for Strategic Studies (which includes Robert Blackwill, former Thaksin Shinawatra lobbyist), as well as a myriad of pro-Thaksin, pro-globalist, pro-red shirt websites that form the nucleus of the movement’s intelligentsia. Prachatai is also the recent recipient of the contrived “Courage in Journalism Award” bestowed by the globalist-funded “International Women’s Media Foundation (IWMF).” Some of IWMF’s corporate supporters include Bank of America, Chevron, Northrop Grumman, and Merril Lynch. It would be misguided if not completely naive to believe these corporations have any interest in promoting “courage in journalism.” Rather, they are attempting to legitimize what is in reality, foreign-funded, subversive propaganda working on their behalf for their own self-serving interests.
Another often cited organization used to pressure the Thai government is Reporters Without Borders, funded by the corporate-lined National Endowment for Democracy, which has downgraded Thailand as well regarding it as a “nation under surveillance.” The organization cites the crackdown on the very elements involved in the foreign-backed “red” color revolution as the reasoning behind its judgment, using the NED funded Prachatai website in particular as an example. Reporters Without Borders attempts to portray such crackdowns as an affront to freedom, even as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton openly admits to funding subversion through these very organizations worldwide.
Freedom House is a big fan of NED funded
Prachatai as well. Prachatai is an over-the-top propaganda clearinghouse for the Thai red color revolution.
Transparency International is yet another source frequently cited by the Thai “red” color revolution. The organization downgraded Thailand’s score on the contrived “Corruption Perception Index” from 3.6 under Thaksin to 3.4 under the current government. Transparency International, however, is funded by perhaps the most corrupt corporations on earth, in human history, including: Anglo American, Ernst & Young, Exxon Mobil, General Electric, Merck, Procter & Gamble, Shell International, Abu Dhabi National Energy Company, and Wal-Mart. Foundation support includes the eugenicist Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the criminally run World Bank.
It should be intuitive that organizations funded by such self-serving corporate-financier interests are entirely disingenuous, their agenda’s completely compromised, and their work entirely subversive. It should also be intuitive that corporations like Exxon and Northrop Grumman are not interested in Thailand’s “democracy,” “freedom,” or “human rights.” They are simply leveraging these ideals before an impressionable audience in order to expand the global elite’s military and economic hegemony throughout the region.
After the July, 2011 Elections
The International Crisis Group, in their April 11, 2011 report, “Thailand: The Calm Before Another Storm?” concludes that “even if the elections are free, fair and peaceful, it will still be a challenge for all sides to accept the results. If another coalition is pushed together under pressure from the royalist establishment, it will be a rallying cry for renewed mass protests by the Red Shirts that could plunge Thailand into more violent confrontation.” Just as in Egypt, ElBaradei’s “National Front for Change” lost elections and subsequently took to the streets claiming the polls were unfair. They were determined to seize the nation through ochlocracy with the backing of their globalist sponsors. Likewise in 2009 after elections in Iran, the admittedly US-funded “green revolution” took to the streets to override elections they claimed were illegitimate.
Upcoming July, 2011 elections in Thailand will play out in a similar manner. It is highly unlikely Thailand will accept a win by Thaksin’s proxy political party, now run by his own sister, Yingluck Shinawatra in a shocking display of overt nepotism. Thaksin himself is a convicted criminal and a fugitive operating out of Dubai. He has a two year jail term sentenced to him and yet he still openly decides matters for Thailand’s opposition party as its leader. He also often calls into “red shirt” political rallies giving out dictates and describing the party’s agenda. His image is frequently used on party billboards to draw off of his “cult of personality.”
Combined, it would be almost unthinkable to allow such overt criminality to seize back power, no matter what the polls decided. However, Thaksin’s political party, rife with infighting, overt corruption and nepotism, and many of its party members facing trials and jail time for their role in last year’s violence, most likely will not form the ruling government within Thailand’s parliamentary system.
Despite being a fugitive with a 2-year jail sentence, Thaksin Shinawatra openly dictates Thailand’s opposition party’s agenda from his Dubai resort. His image is tapped for what is essentially a “cult of personality” that has been meticulously developed over the years. Thaksin’s sister, Yingluck Shinawatra is now leading the party as her brother’s proxy, in a shocking display of overt nepotism.
The amount of time, energy, and resources poured into Thaksin, his proxy party, and his street mobs by his Western backers are surely not going to end because of unfavorable results during the upcoming polls. In fact, we can expect, just as in Iran and Egypt, the remaining resources on hand to be pumped into massive street protests and unprecedented levels of violence.
Unlike in Egypt however, where events took many by surprise, we have the fraudulent “Arab Spring” as our historical model to gauge future events by, including destabilization growing in Thailand, as well as in Belarus, Myanmar, and even Pakistan. With this knowledge in mind, awareness can be raised and these gambits potentially balked. Once the disingenuous nature of this revolution is exposed, the nefarious money and organizations behind it revealed, this will be one less tool the globalists will have to menace and dominate the planet and its people with.
|Trailer: Webster Tarpley & Elite’s Plan for Global Extermination - Wednesday, May 18, 2011|
In this interview, Dr. Tarpley reviews the writings of John P. Holdren, the current White House science advisor. This interview conclusively exposes scientific elite’s true agenda, world-wide genocide and the formation of a global government to rule.
read more ...
|Lieberman ‘Will Have Questions’ About Awlaki’s Post-9/11 Pentagon Dinner - Wednesday, May 18, 2011|
Leading neocon in Congress, Sen. Joe Lieberman, responded to questions and indicated that he would investigate why al Qaeda’s now #1 operative, Anwar al-Awlaki, was invited to an official Department of Defense meeting in the wake of the September 11 attacks.
May 18, 2011
Leading neocon in Congress, Sen. Joe Lieberman, responded to questions and indicated that he would investigate why al Qaeda’s now #1 operative, Anwar al-Awlaki, was invited to an official Department of Defense meeting in the wake of the September 11 attacks.
The questions were raised by Luke Rudkowski, We Are Change.org founder and contributor for RT’s Adam vs. The Man, who confronted the senator, citing reports in both Fox News andCBS News.
Lieberman initially dismissed the questions, saying he’d be ‘surprised’ by such reports, but later stated that he “will look into that.” However, Sen. Lieberman suggested that the Pentagon likely did not know who he was ‘at the time.’ This notion is debunked, however, as the FBI repeatedly flagged Awlaki for links to at least three hijackers in the first week after 9/11.
“Well, I’m going to have some questions about that,” Lieberman said, extending his impromptu remarks. “He’s a target of interest. We know that he’s been involved in a series of attacks on our homeland. Of course, he communicates in English on his website. So he’s a particular danger in terms of radicalizing people here in the U.S. who are going to jihadist websites.”Awlaki is reportedly connected to the Fort Hood shootings, the attempted Christmas Day underwear bombings, the Times Square dud and many other events. Though Awlaki is now considered a target for drone attacks in Yemen as well as the #1 American on the CIA’s kill or capture list, the American-born terrorist was a welcomed guest at the Pentagon, “rubb[ing] shoulders with high-ranking military personnel just months after the atrocities,” according to the Daily Mail.
The event, supposedly an outreach to the Muslim community, was organized by the Army’s Office of Government Counsel. Reports specify that Awlaki was vetted before attending, again, despite having been interviewed repeatedly by the FBI immediately after 9/11 for his links to at least three hijackers. “A former high-ranking FBI agent” who spoke with Fox News blamed an “arrogant” and politically-motivated vetting process at the DoD.
Though Senator Joe Lieberman is an unlikely advocate for exposing the truth behind 9/11, it is important that he acknowledged these questions on record and agreed to look further into the reasons behind them. It is up to the real activists to pressure Lieberman and other elected officials to really investigate the deadly duplicity behind U.S. anti-terrorism policy.
For more information and a detailed analysis of the cozy relationship bred between the Pentagon and its client-group al Qaeda, please read ‘Al Qaeda 100% Pentagon Run.’