Thursday, January 20, 2011

TUNISIAN REVOLT - THE WORK OF SOROS AND THE USA


In Foreign Policy Journal, on 18 January 2011, Dr. K R Bolton writes about the part played in the Tunisian Revolt by George Soros and the (CIA-linked) National Endowment for Democracy.

According to Doctor Bolton:

1. All of these 'revolts' follow the same pattern.

They are all planned by the Open Society network of George Soros, and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

They work in tandem.

2. Looking at the Tunisian recipients for NED grants we find the following, for 2009:

Tunisia's Al-Jahedh Forum for Free Thought (AJFFT) $131,000

" AJFFT will conduct leadership training workshops, support local youth cultural projects…"

Association for the Promotion of Education (APES) $27,000

"To strengthen the capacity of Tunisian high school teachers...


Mohamed Ali Center for Research, Studies and Training (CEMAREF) $33,500

To train a core group of Tunisian youth activists on leadership and organizational skills...

110118 Tunisia unity government unravels 04  تشكيل حكومة الوحدة الوطنية في تونس  Echec du gouvernement d'unité nationale en Tunisie
Tunisia by magharebia

3. 2006: Al-Jahedh Forum for Free Thought (AJFFT), $51,000; American Center for International Labor Solidarity, $99,026, the purposes of which were to cultivate relations with Tunisian journalists; Arab Institute for Human Rights (AIHR) $37,500, for the purposes of training a cadre of teachers in “civic values;” Committee for the Respect of Freedom and Human Rights in Tunisia (CRLDH) $70,000, to advocate amnesty for political prisoners; and Mohamed Ali Center for Research, Studies and Training (CEMAREF) $39,500 2007: AJFFT received $45,000. The Arab Institute for Human Rights received $43,900 to train teachers in their so-called “civic values” ideology, focusing on primary schools and training school inspectors. The Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE) received $175, 818 to inculcate free enterprise doctrines among Tunisian businessmen...The Mohamed Ali Center for Research, Studies, and Training received $38,500 in 2007. Also that year: Moroccan Organization for Human Rights (OMDH) $60,000 - To strengthen a group of young Tunisian attorneys as they mobilize citizens on reform issues. 2008: Al-Jahedh Forum for Free Thought received $57,000; Center for International Private Enterprise, $163,205; Centre Mohamed Ali de Reserches d’Etudes et de Formation, $37,800; Tunisian Arab Civitas Institute, $43,000, aimed at training teachers on the NED ideologies of “civic values.”

4. "NED has promoted in Tunisia ... a revolutionary cadre based on youth and professionals for the overthrow of a regime that is seen as an anomaly in the 'new world order.'"

5. The 'colour revolutions' use radio and TV stations.

In the case of Tunisia, Radio Kalima had the support of Soros's organisation.

6. At least ten of the twenty-two directors of NED are also members of the Council on Foreign Relations.

7. The US Establishment showed no sympathy for Ben Ali at the crucial moment.

Among those unsympathetic to Ben Ali were Elliott Abrams, formerly national security adviser for Middle East affairs and now Council on Foreign Relations Senior Fellow of Middle East Studies, Hillary Clinton and President Obama.

Website for this image

In Tunisia, on 19 October 2010:

"Soldiers, civil defence teams, police, doctors and experts in reconnaissance, decontamination, and bomb disposal spent all last week on a Tunisian football pitch."

"The ASSISTEX 3 simulation exercise brought together 400 specialists from the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, India, Italy, Spain, South Africa, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, the United Kingdom, a regional team from the Caribbean and three sub-regional teams from North, West and East Africa." (Mock attack staged on Rades pitch (Magharebia.com)/ Re: Foreign Policy Magazine: CFR/Soros declares victory in Tunisia )

~~

Tunisia supported neither the 1991 Gulf War nor the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Ben Ali supported the Palestinians.

In September 2010, Tunisia ratified the international treaty banning cluster munitions, becoming the first country in the Middle East and North Africa to do so...

The 2010 Corruption Perception Index was released by Transparency International on 26 October 2010.

The report shows that Tunisia is the least corrupt country in North Africa.

LIES ABOUT BEN ALI AND THE SHAH

aangirfan: SOROS OR SOME CHINESE GUY? ELLIOT ABRAMS SPEAKS

BCT denies officially the affair of Leila Ben Ali's 1.5 tons of gold

~~

16 comments:

veritas6464 said...

Hey Aan,...I have been following your coverage of the Tunisia crisis with much zeal. Your work as usual is excellent. I wonder if you visit "The Ugly Truth" site at all. Many people rave about this mark guy, I find the site to be a forum for middle-class cafe society hobbyists; I say this because of the content that is allowed to appear, surely the reason we post here in Sherwood cyber-forest is because the MSM is for the zionazis? Therefore giving equal time to the truth is our raison d’être. So, why give any time to the zionazis out here unless you’re a shill or a sayanim? Check out this recent post by some fop in the UK

http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2011/01/20/hijab-makes-a-return-in-tunisia/

veritas

Honk Bonk Man said...

I just wonder if Soros is a member of the Aspen Institute.
One of their lifetime trustees is Henry A. Kissinger ( Chairman
Kissinger Associates, Inc)
http://www.aspeninstitute.org/

nobody said...

Hey Aang, publish/don't publish, either way is good.

I just wanted to tip my hat at your place rather than buried in my comments. Excellent job mate. I haven't been on the internet for however many weeks and I gotta tell you, I was sucked in! I knew nothing about Tunisia and I see what's on the TV and it looked credible and I bought it. Me, the super cynic. How embarrassing.

Anyway, it's a good thing you're here. You've set a fellow straight, ha ha.

Anon said...

Very many thanks for all the comments.

(The Aspen Institute is heavily involved in Tunisia and North Africa.)

- Aangirfan

Anon said...

I left a comment at theuglytruth.wordpress.com pointing out that many Moslems work for the CIA.

Yvonne Ridley welcomes the Tunisian revolution. Naive or spooky?

- Aangirfan

Anonymous said...

I've been following your excellent coverage and agree with most of what you say. With revolutions or coups like this, once they start they cannot completely be controlled.

One problem, as I commented earlier, is the unemployed and disaffected youth. At street level many educated young people in Tunisia were unemployed and without connections to get jobs so when the time came along (albeit through 'events' which may have been planned) they took the chance to revolt. Considering the huge population increase, perhaps Ben Ali did well to accomplish what he did.

What we can hope for, but probably not expect, is that some good will come out of all this and that a free society will emerge. But better a benevolent dictator than a 'controlled' 'democracy' - the trouble is that most people don't see these things. The people who will assume power, regardless of possible initial good intentions, will very likely gradually come to enjoy the financial benefits that power provides and run the country for their own benefit so that one ruling monopoly becomes another. The ANC in South Africa comes to mind. Or Tunisia will become destabilised.

I worked in Saddam Hussein's Iraq and, provided one kept one's mouth shut on anything even remotely political, life was OK. In Baghdad, I used to wander around by myself in the dark in the evenings (there was a blackout during in Iran-Iraq war) and enjoy fresh river fish and the excellent local beer in the riverside restaurants. Look at life in today's 'democracy' and the huge numbers of Iraqi refugees.

It will be interesting to follow Tunisia's future education, health and general prosperity under democracy and compare it with that of the last 15 years.

Anon said...

Thank you for the valuable insight into life under Saddam.

- Aangirfan

Anonymous said...

If I may, I will compare and contrast Iraq and Iran because I worked and travelled in both countries in the 70’s and 80’s:

Iraq is (or was) a far more developed country. Most of Iran was primitive, with 16th century conditions in rural areas when I was there, in contrast to far more developed towns and cities.

In Iraq in 1973, I was brusquely questioned by Iraqi secret police when travelling on a bus to the southern marshes (which Saddam later drained and destroyed). When I arrived at my destination I was met by a schoolteacher (who had been telephoned and was expecting me). He took me on the crossbar of his bicycle around the village. I visited a school, where 8 year old children were being taught English. This was in a rural area far from the capital. The police had understood my motives in wanting to visit El Chebayish, where there were three tourist bungalows, and had arranged a welcome for me. This was at a time when there were no diplomatic relations between the UK and Iraq. I later spent much time travelling around the southern half of the country.

Iraq had a proper infrastructure with shared taxis, buses, East German trains, (unlike Iran) auditors of foreign companies demanding international standards of book-keeping and tax paid on real profit.

Iran had train services with mixed sex sleeping cars (something that amazed me when I found women sharing my compartment on an overnight train). It was a mixture of western ideas under the Shah and primitive conditions in rural areas. The Shah, surrounded by courtiers who sheltered him from the real world, went too fast in modernising, believing in his own rhetoric. We might compare the Shah and Ben Ali, but Ben Ali achieved more in Tunisia.

I was working for a US company and spent a year in Iran. After 9 months of the staff telling me how much they loved the Shah and me expressing huge doubts because I saw going on, in the last 3 months they finally opened up and confessed that they hated him. It was then (late 1973) that I knew his reign could not last.

By the time I finally left in the late 70’s, Iranian beer and wine had more or less been replaced by imports (Japanese beer replacing locally brewed Tuborg, no more Bin 98 wine) as probably import controls and collection of import duties had collapsed. I knew it could not last and on my next visit shortly after under Khomeini took control everything was much more relaxed although alcohol was not available except on the black market. But that brief period did not last … the left wing opposition was soon rounded up and summarily executed.

In comparison, Iraq was a country where western capitalism had made no great inroads whereas Iran was wedded to the American system. One can study US propaganda about Saddam and realise that in fact Saddam did not make or steal a huge fortune from his country. Not that I am saying he was a decent person, but from the 50’s to the 90’s it was “kill or be killed” and he did what he had to to remain in control. In short, it could have been worse. Unfortunately, the marshes were destroyed by Saddam after the inhabitants, believing what Bush said about marching to Baghdad and removing him, openly supported the US at the very end of the Gulf War. I remember horrific coverage on Sky News in the UK of US helicopter gunships machine gunning down the defenceless Iraqi army on the flat, featureless terrain between Basrah and Kuwait, after they had thrown down their arms and were making their way back home on foot. There was nowhere to hide.

Since the 80’s both countries have been destroyed by the US and the middle classes forced to flee.

It was safe in both countries in those days and, from reports, still safe in Iran today provided one does not venture onto the roads.

In Iran the population has doubled and the income per head halved. In Iraq, …

Anon said...

Dear Anonymous,

Very many thanks for that insider's view of Iran and Iraq.

It is so much more valuable than the information or disinformation from the media.

I once knew a UK foreign correspondent who on one occasion broadcast on a UK radio station about Afghanistan. He pretended to be in Kabul. But his son confessed that his Dad was really in a studio in London.

- Aangirfan

Anonymous said...

Yeah, Freeman Moxy all over again.

I, too, would like to thank Anonymous for his comments.

It's sad what the west has done to Iraq (and now Tunisia?). I remember those old National Geographics on Afghanistan. Didn't see no bhurkas, just colourful scarves.

Iraq too, used to have a standard of living comparable to East Germany, ie, good universities, free health care, women doctors, etc.

Now....

Loads of "Internationals" went to Iraq before the invasion. Not that you'd know about it. Among them some Spaniards, with camera. They came up with a documentary, Bagdad Rap (http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=2829482674356388982#). It starts kinda glum, but the best bit is when they let the locals speak. It's so sad to see bright intelligent people telling us what is so fucking obvious. Where are they now?

Better deffinition copy at http://amics21.com/faluya/BagdadRap-English480.mov, feel free to steal. (Sorry about the subtitle overload.)

Peace. Love.

Luis

Anon said...

Dear Anon,

Glad you mentioned the old Afghanistan portrayed in National Geographic, before the USA wrecked the country!

- Aangirfan

Anonymous said...

A common knowledge that Shah of Iran was placed in CIA backed coup by overthrowing Musadiq's democratically elected government."Imam Khumayni telegraphed both the Shah and the prime minister of the day, warning them to desist from violating both the law of Islam and the Iranian Constitution of 1907, failing which the ulama would engage in a sustained campaign of protest. Rejecting all compromise measures, the Imam was able to force the repeal of the laws in question seven weeks after they had been promulgated. This achievement marked his emergence on the scene as the principal voice of opposition to the Shah.


A more serious confrontation was not long in coming. In January 1963, the Shah announced a six-point program of reform that he termed the White Revolution, an American-inspired package of measures designed to give his regime a liberal and progressive facade.


he [Khomeini] listed the various ways in which the Shah had violated the constituent, condemned the spread of moral corruption in the country, and accused the Shah of comprehensive submission to America and Israel: “I see the solution to lie in this tyrannical government being removed, for the crime of violating the ordinances of Islam and trampling the constitution, and in a government taking its place that adheres to Islam and has concern for the Iranian nation.
On the afternoon of ‘Ashura (June 3, 1963), Imam Khumayni delivered a speech at the Fayziya madrasa in which he drew parallels between the Umayyad caliph Yazid and the Shah and warned the Shah that if he did not change his ways the day would come when the people would offer up thanks for his departure from the country.[16] This warning was remarkably prescient, for on January 16, 1979, the Shah was indeed obliged to leave Iran amidst scenes of popular rejoicing. The immediate effect of the Imam’s speech was, however, his arrest two days later at 3 o’clock in the morning by a group of commandos who hastily transferred him to the Qasr prison in Tehran.

As dawn broke on June 3, the news of his arrest spread first through Qum and then to other cities. In Qum, Tehran, Shiraz, Mashhad and Varamin, masses of angry demonstrators were confronted by tanks and ruthlessly slaughtered. It was not until six days later that order was fully restored. This uprising of 15 Khurdad 1342 (the day in the Iranian calendar on which it began) marked a turning point in Iranian history. Henceforth the repressive and dictatorial nature of the Shah’s regime, reinforced by the unwavering support of the United States, was constantly intensified, and with it the prestige of Imam Khumayni as the only figure of note - whether religious or secular - willing to challenge him. The arrogance imbuing the Shah’s policies also caused a growing number of the ulama to abandon their quietism and align themselves with the radical goals set forth by the Imam. The movement of 15 Khurdad may therefore be characterized as the prelude to the Islamic Revolution of 1978-79; the goals of that revolution and its leadership had already been determined.





exracts from the book, Imam Khomeini: A Short Biography
http://www.al-islam.org/imambiography/

Anonymous said...

On the afternoon of ‘Ashura (June 3, 1963), Imam Khumayni delivered a speech at the Fayziya madrasa in which he drew parallels between the Umayyad caliph Yazid and the Shah and warned the Shah that if he did not change his ways the day would come when the people would offer up thanks for his departure from the country.[16] This warning was remarkably prescient, for on January 16, 1979, the Shah was indeed obliged to leave Iran amidst scenes of popular rejoicing. The immediate effect of the Imam’s speech was, however, his arrest two days later at 3 o’clock in the morning by a group of commandos who hastily transferred him to the Qasr prison in Tehran.

As dawn broke on June 3, the news of his arrest spread first through Qum and then to other cities. In Qum, Tehran, Shiraz, Mashhad and Varamin, masses of angry demonstrators were confronted by tanks and ruthlessly slaughtered. It was not until six days later that order was fully restored. This uprising of 15 Khurdad 1342 (the day in the Iranian calendar on which it began) marked a turning point in Iranian history. Henceforth the repressive and dictatorial nature of the Shah’s regime, reinforced by the unwavering support of the United States, was constantly intensified, and with it the prestige of Imam Khumayni as the only figure of note - whether religious or secular - willing to challenge him. The arrogance imbuing the Shah’s policies also caused a growing number of the ulama to abandon their quietism and align themselves with the radical goals set forth by the Imam. The movement of 15 Khurdad may therefore be characterized as the prelude to the Islamic Revolution of 1978-79; the goals of that revolution and its leadership had already been determined.



After nineteen days in the Qasr prison, Imam Khumayni was moved first, to the ‘Ishratabad military base and then to a house in the Davudiya section of Tehran where he was kept under surveillance. Despite the killings that had taken place during the uprising, mass demonstrations were held in Tehran and elsewhere demanding his release and some of his colleagues came to the capital from Qum to lend their support to the demand. It was not, however, until April 7, 1964 that he was released, no doubt on the assumption that imprisonment had tempered his views and that the movement he had led would quietly subside. Three days after his release and return to Qum, he dispelled such illusions by refuting officially inspired rumors that he had come to an understanding with the Shah’s regime and by declaring that the movement inaugurated on 15 Khurdad would continue. Aware of the persisting differences in approach between the Imam and some of the other senior religious scholars, the regime had also attempted to discredit him by creating dissension in Qum. These attempts, too, were unsuccessful, for early in June 1964 all the major ulama put their signatures to declarations commemorating the first anniversary of the uprising of 15 Khurdad.
Despite its failure to sideline or silence Imam Khumayni, the Shah’s regime continued its pro-American policies unwaveringly. In the autumn of 1964, it concluded a status of forces agreement with the United States that provided immunity from prosecution for all American personnel in Iran and their dependents. This occasioned the Imam to deliver what was perhaps the most vehement speech of the entire struggle against the Shah; certainly one of his close associates, Ayatullah Muhammad Mufattih, had never seen him so agitated.[17] He denounced the agreement as a surrender of Iranian independence and sovereignty, made in exchange for a $200 million loan that would be of benefit only to the Shah and his associates, and described as traitors all those in the Majlis who voted in favor of it; the government lacked all legitimacy, he concluded.[18]


exracts from the book, Imam Khomeini: A Short Biography
http://www.al-islam.org/imambiography/

Anonymous said...

Shortly before dawn on November 4, 1964, again a detachment of commandos surrounded the Imam’s house in Qum, arrested him, and this time took him directly to Mehrabad airport in Tehran for immediate banishment to Turkey. The decision to deport rather than arrest Imam Khumayni and imprison him in Iran was based no doubt on the hope that in exile he would fade from popular memory. Physical elimination would have been fraught with the danger of an uncontrollable popular uprising. As for the choice of Turkey, this reflected the security cooperation existing between the Shah’s regime and Turkey.



The Imam was first lodged in room 514 of Bulvar Palas Oteli in Ankara, a moderately comfortable hotel in the Turkish capital, under the joint surveillance of Iranian and Turkish security officials. On November 12, he was moved from Ankara to Bursa, where he was to reside another eleven months. The stay in Turkey cannot have been congenial, for Turkish law forbade Imam Khumayni to wear the cloak and turban of the Muslim scholar, an identity which was integral to his being; the sole photographs in existence to show him bareheaded all belong to the period of exile in Turkey.[19] However, on December 3, 1964, he was joined in Bursa by his eldest son, Hajj Mustafa Khumayni; he was also permitted to receive occasional visitors from Iran, and was supplied with a number of books on fiqh. He made use of his forced stay in Bursa to compile Tahrir al-Wasila, a two-volume compendium on questions of jurisprudence. Important and distinctive are the fatwas this volume contains, grouped under the headings of al-amr bi ‘l-ma’ruf wa ‘l-nahy ‘an al-munkar and difa’. The Imam decrees, for example, that “if it is feared that the political and economic domination (by foreigners) over an Islamic land will lead to the enslavement and weakening of the Muslims, then such domination must be repelled by appropriate means, including passive resistance, the boycott of foreign goods, and the abandonment of all dealings and association with the foreigners in question.” Similarly, “if an attack by foreigners on one of the Islamic states is anticipated, it is incumbent on all Islamic states to repel the attack by all possible means; indeed, this is incumbent on the Muslims as a whole.”[20]

http://www.al-islam.org/imambiography/

Anonymous said...

If you carry on reading you will find that he left Turkey for Iraq where he continued his mission:
Imam Khumayni was, in fact, constantly, and acutely aware of the connections between Iranian affairs and those of the Muslim world in general and the Arab lands in particular. This awareness led him to issue from Najaf a proclamation to the Muslims of the world on the occasion of the hajj in 1971, and to comment, with special frequency and emphasis, on the problems posed by Israel for the Muslim world. The Imam’s strong concern for the Palestine question led him to issue a fatwa on August 27, 1968 authorizing the use of religious monies (vujuh-i shar’i) to support the nascent activities of al-Asifa, the armed wing of the Palestine Liberation Organization; this was confirmed by a similar and more detailed ruling issued after a meeting with the Baghdad representative of the PLO.


http://www.al-islam.org/imambiography/

I know hard to accept for your guys that there are FREE LEADERS who make FREE CHOICES fro their people, countries free from interference from CIA/ MI6 etc, need to read more.

Anonymous said...

TUNISIA REVOLUTION:
THE WORK OF TUNISIANS, ESPECIALLY THE YOUTH!
REASONS:
-HORRENDOUS HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD ON THE PART OF THE BEN ALI REGIME FOR YEARS AND YEARS.
-COMPLETE DENIAL OF FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION AND OF EXPRESSION (No oulet whatsoever to express dissent or even the slightest constructive criticisme of the regime).
-MAFIA-LIKE PREDATORY PRACTICES ON THE PART OF THE BEN ALI CLAN TO A POINT WHERE IT BECAME UNACCEPTABLE TO TUNISIANS OF ALL STRIPES

THESE ARE THE REASONS, ALL THE REST IS IGNORANT, PREJUDICED BLA BLA BLA ...

 
Site Meter