Guest Post: Middle East Chaos: What To Learn And What To Expect

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Giordano Bruno of Neithercorp Press

Middle East Chaos: What To Learn And What To Expect

There are many different kinds of revolution; some more effective
than others. Telling the difference between a successful revolution and
a failed revolution can be tricky. Often, on the surface, they look
exactly the same. The secret is to set aside what we would “like” to
see, and be brutally honest about what was actually accomplished in the
course of the dissenting action. Has power been fully rescinded by the
offending government or regime to the people, or, to yet another corrupt
bureaucracy with a slightly different face? Have the puppet strings of
corporate globalists been severed from your country, or do they remain
strong as ever? Has ANY corrupt official actually been punished for the
crimes that led to the insurgency in the first place, or, did they fly
off scot-free to their million dollar villas in Ecuador, drinking
mojitos in wicker recliners and watching the disaster they created
unfold on CNN? Who ultimately benefited from the event?

Today, the entire Middle East is on the verge of complete
destabilization and possibly civil war. Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Bahrain,
Yemen, and other nations are experiencing a shockwave of unrest not
seen since the 1970’s. Western media sources are calling it a “people’s
revolt”, one which the Obama administration is heartily embracing like
an old relative. But are we witnessing the democratization of the
cradle of civilization, or something else entirely? How will we be
affected by this tide of confusion? Instead of falling into panic and
fear over the growing chaos, what can discerning Americans learn from a
social implosion on the other side of the world that will help us to
survive a similar occurrence here? Let’s examine some of the distinct
moments that have characterized the Middle East debacle, the underlying
and corrupt influences that surround them, as well as certain historical
facts of the region that globalist engineers would rather we forget…

Molding The Arab World

Are globalist interests involved in the breakdown of the Middle East?
Most certainly. However, this much widespread resentment and pent-up
collective rage is not something that can be easily fabricated. It is
far more likely that anger over the feudal governing tactics of
dictators in the Arab world (many of which were installed or supported
by U.S. and European interests) is very real, and has been building for
quite some time. So then, why are Western governments applauding the
overthrow of despots they themselves placed in power?

The Mubarak regime was the second largest recipient of U.S. financial
and military aid in the world. One third of ALL publicly reported U.S.
foreign aid goes to Egypt and Israel:

Without this vast military aid from the U.S., Mubarak would not have
been able to maintain his 30 year reign. This is a cold hard fact. So
then, why go against a leader you already have firmly in your grasp?

When the Shah of Iran (a violent madman we anointed) was overthrown
by popular revolt in 1979, the U.S. government responded with vitriol
and saber rattling. When Hosni Mubarak (a violent madman we anointed)
was overthrown this past month, the U.S. government responded with
cheers and warm regards. What was the difference between the revolution
in Iran, and the revolutions all over the Middle East today?

Like most puppet leaders and figureheads, Mubarak was an errand boy, a
conduit for implementing globalist policies in Egypt. His
relinquishment of power was in reality nothing of the kind, because the
power was never his to give back. It is important to take note that
Mubarak’s cabinet and most of the existing government and military
structure remains firmly entrenched:

Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, who leads the ruling military
council and has been defense minister for about 20 years, took
“temporary” control of Egypt after Mubarak ceded authority. Tantawi
retains very strong ties to Washington D.C. and an unerring loyalty to
Mubarak’s policies, which is perhaps why Barack Obama seemed so jubilant
about Mubarak’s departure. In the recent and controversial Wikileaks
release of private diplomatic cables, Tantawi is famously referred to as
“Mubarak’s Poodle”:

The key here is that globalist circles support the change in Egypt
exactly because nothing will change for the citizenry. The Egyptian
people will not gain true influence in the politics of their own
country, and they may have even less influence over their own lives if a
military infrastructure remains embedded within their government.
Their entire rebellion was diluted and redirected, because they naively
focused on Mubarak as the source of all their ills, instead of the
corrupt system he was a mere front-man for.

What about Libya? Muammar Gaddafi, the crazy bag lady of third world
dictators, was the darling of the UN in 2009 when he was nominated the
head of the African Union. He was just as much a monster then as he is
today, and as far as I know his human rights record has remained dismal,
but then again, he was helping the globalists by paying the AU dues of
numerous countries with Libyan oil money and luring them towards

Apparently, Gaddafi has outlived his usefulness as international bodies now fully support the rebellion in Libya.

Remember Tunisia? That fight for freedom that the mainstream media
essentially ignored until it was almost over and the two decade rule of
Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali (another despot with a history of human rights
violations who was also installed with the help of Western interests,
primarily Italy) was finally overthrown? Well, now globalist proponents
suddenly “love” Tunisia and are promoting it as a “model revolution”.
Why? Maybe because the dastardly duo of McCain and Lieberman are in
town to offer the new Tunisian government “training from the U.S. to
help Tunisia’s military provide security”:

Yikes. These are the same guys who drafted the ‘Enemy Belligerents Act’
which would allow the U.S. government to treat any American citizen as
an “enemy combatant”, removing Habeas Corpus and all Constitutional
rights to a fair trial. I guess the lesson to Americans and most
importantly the Liberty Movement is that if they can’t beat you, they’ll
try to join you, and then co-opt you. My hope is that the Tunisians
will turn down the Trojan Horse offerings of sewer rats like McCain and
Lieberman, but if they do, I imagine the globalists will not be quite so
friendly anymore.

What is happening in the Middle East is a perfect example of the
manipulation of existing dissent towards establishment ends. The
surface trigger for these events is obviously the doubling of food
prices across the world in the past two years (you can thank the
orchestrated devaluation of western currencies for a large part of
this). People have a bad tendency to weather all kinds of atrocities as
long as they are fed, but once certain necessities are taken from the
masses, they WILL act, usually in a violent and unfocused manner. These
revolutions are, for the most part, legitimate when they begin, but are
co-opted as they progress, chiefly because the cultures involved do not
understand where the real threat is coming from. Is centralization of
the Middle East through catastrophe the goal? Perhaps, though, when all
is said and done, I think the upheaval in the Middle East is much more
about the U.S., than the Muslim world…

Déjà Vu All Over Again…

For those who really want a comprehensive sense of what is happening
in the Middle East and why, I suggest a look into the last major
Egyptian revolution of 1952. At that time, Britain was still the
preeminent western power in the Arab world, and its control of the oil
supply was absolute, much like the stranglehold the U.S. has enjoyed for
many decades. Oil was pegged to the British sterling and any trade in
crude required a conversion to the British currency. In fact, it was
often said that the British Empire’s power after World War II was
entirely dependent on its reserve currency status in oil markets. Any
of this beginning to sound familiar?

In 1952, a revolution against the Egyptian puppet monarchy and its
British overseers burst seemingly from nowhere, led by a group called
the “Free Officers Movement”. In reality, the insurrection, fed by
years of corrupt Aristocratic rule, was initiated and in some cases
funded by both U.S. and Soviet agencies in tandem! In 1951-1952,
nationalist police officers backed by the U.S. and Russia began
supporting fedayeen terrorist groups using false flag attacks to weaken
the region (is this sounding even more familiar?). Interestingly, this
era was the birth of the so called “Muslim Brotherhood”, a group which
has suddenly resurfaced in media discussion today.

Riots spread through Cairo, King Farouk was overthrown, the British
were eventually run out, and their control of the Suez Canal was lost.
But the story doesn’t end there…

The British and the French wanted the Suez back (at least that’s what
they claimed), for control of the Suez meant control of Middle East oil
markets. A plan was initiated by the two European powers to take back
the canal using an Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip as a spring board.
This time, Israeli agents were used by the British to conduct false
flag attacks, which were presented as a pretext for Israel to move
against Egypt. The British and French followed by landing troops near
Cyprus and Algeria.

The plan would have worked, except for one thing, the British were
financially weak after two world wars and were completely dependent on
American investment in their treasury debt. In response to the British
action, the U.S. along with the UN threatened to halt investment in
British debt and to stop price support of the Pound Sterling. This led
to the eventual fall of the pound as the world reserve currency, and the
rise of the dollar.

Official history portrays this move by the U.S., Russia, and the UN,
as an attempt to undermine the long reach of the English. It is rather
convenient however that the pound was dethroned just as plans for the
European Union were beginning to be implemented in the early 1950’s. It
seems to me that the British elites were fully aware that their futile
attempts to hold onto the Middle East would result in the fall of the
Pound; it was simply the British people’s turn to be taken down a few
notches, and centralized. The similarities between the British Empire’s
decline over Middle East oil in the 1950’s and our decline over Middle
East oil today, are startling.

If history was to repeat itself, I would guess that the U.S. will
soon be embroiled in political or even military operations to control
the Suez, and retain its dollar peg to oil, which will illicit a
negative response by international investment, causing central banks to
dump their U.S. treasury investments and the dollar as a reserve

Think of it as a grand theater meant to amuse only global bankers…

Energy Crisis To Strike The U.S. And Protect Globalists

An unstable Middle East benefits very few people, and that, I
suppose, is the point. As we have covered here in a multitude of
articles, the U.S. is on the verge of engineered economic collapse,
driven mainly by the steady and purposeful devaluation of the dollar and
our quickly expanding national debt. If you are a corporate central
banking group seeking the death of the greenback as the world reserve
currency, you face the very serious problem of avoiding immediate blame
or retribution for your actions. What better way to escape the torches
and pitchforks of the furious populace than to find a scapegoat, or a
distraction even more terrifying than poverty?

Middle East turbulence provides the perfect smokescreen for the inflationary destruction of the dollar.

First and foremost, it hides the already skyrocketing price of
energy, which was inevitable due to our devaluing currency (oil is
traded primarily in dollars), but can now be blamed entirely on “Middle
Eastern instability”. Already, the cost of crude has spiked to $100 a
barrel, with no sign of relenting. Certainly, many Americans will now
blame Egypt or Libya for their empty wallets, instead of global banks.

To add to the confusion, various agencies are feeding the MSM with a
rainbow of mixed messages, which leave Americans vulnerable to
uncertainty, making them far more malleable. For instance, the IMF has
recently stated that the world can easily withstand $100 oil (a lie),
while the International Energy Agency has stated that $100 oil would be
“very very bad”, leading to a complete derailment of the global economy
(which was going to occur anyway):

Social and economic disaster ANYWHERE in the world today will
invariably cut the thin threads of psychological faith in our so called
recovery. The system was a sham to begin with, and the quantitative
easing methods of the Federal Reserve were never intended to actually
“save” our financial house from collapsing, just prolong the event until
they were ready to sweep away the ailing remains and offer us an IMF
controlled replacement. It is designed to fail, and fail spectacularly.
However, these facts will sink into the fog of history if Americans
are suckered into fixating on a single area of the planet as the sole
source of economic catastrophe.

Finally, if the tension spreads to other nations such as Saudi Arabia
and triggers violent in-fighting, or Israel is tapped as an asset to
instigate wider conflict, we could be looking at all out war on an
incredible scale. This would be the distraction to top all

Is American Upheaval Next?

If crude oil continues to climb above $100 for more than a couple
months, the negative effects will be undeniable. If you thought we had
inflation before, just wait until gas hits $5 to $6 a gallon, and
shipping costs for goods explode. This doesn’t even take into account
the very real possibility that once the Middle East is fully
destabilized, and certain political influences are dissolved, OPEC will
completely de-peg oil from the dollar. From there, the sky is the limit
on gasoline values. Already, Mohamed El-Erian, chief executive officer
at Pacific Investment Management Co. (PIMCO) is calling for a
“stagflationary” market reaction to the turmoil in Libya:

What will be the U.S. government response to a crashing currency and
climbing costs? Austerity! Although, they will probably use different
terminology to describe it. The onset of cost cutting measures is
becoming more visible, especially within the states, where municipal
bond investment has run screaming off a cliff. Large scale protests are
erupting in Wisconsin and Ohio due to state cuts designed to help them
stay financially afloat:

The debate here becomes two sided; do state workers deserve to have
their wages or benefits cut because state governments were fiscally
irresponsible? Should states continue to run up incredible deficits
just to appease state workers (who many consider overpaid) in the short
term? They are both meaningful positions that need to be considered,
however, these two sides miss the full picture.

The fact is, state governments are beyond broke, and eventually, they
will have to nix spending and entitlement programs regardless of how
anyone is affected, especially in the face of unchecked inflation.
State employees and all people dependent on welfare are not necessarily
the culprits behind financial clear-cutting either. The argument cannot
be allowed to devolve into a mindless cage match over who deserves the
money, because, first, there is no money, and second, this distracts
from the original cause of the distress; the corporate banking elites
who instigated the disaster in the first place. Already, I can see a
certain subsection of the populace lashing out wildly at figureheads and
opposition parties, just like in Egypt, instead of the corrupt system
and the banking moguls who built it.

If an Egyptian or Libyan style revolt, driven by blind mob mentality,
takes place in the U.S., we can expect several things to occur. Normal
means of communication will be disrupted; both Egypt and Libya
responded to protests by shutting down all internet and cell phone
traffic. Martial Law will be enacted, and Constitutional rights
suspended; continuity of government programs are already in place to
legally bind states into bowing to DHS and FEMA authority in the event
of any “national disaster”, including a dissenting citizenry. Immediate
bank closures will follow, just as occurred in Egypt, causing a lack of
liquidity in local markets and panic among those who were financially
unprepared. Violence will unavoidably result, giving the Department of
Homeland Security the perfect excuse to implement even more controls,
all for our own “safety” of course.

Some may welcome such bedlam as a sign of change. I don’t see it
that way. Revolution without direction, without a plan, and without a
clear understanding of the source of the problem, is meaningless. We
can allow ourselves to be herded by our own rage into even more
pronounced tyranny, or we can stay focused, collected, and act with
purpose by organizing our communities with the objective of self
sufficiency and self protection. We can work with state legislators to
bring support to Tenth Amendment issues, giving them the strength to
withstand an economic collapse and the ability to turn down DHS or
FEMA’s “help” when the time comes. We can organize intelligently,
without centralized control, or we can hand over our destinies to yet
another elite group of unaccountable autocrats. As impossible as it
might seem, the choice really is up to us. How we act and react in the
coming months will mean the difference between a free and prosperous
America, or a scorch mark in the annals of history.