The more I think about this, the more I think the Arab revolutions are being orchestrated by the Anglo-American establishment. This does not mean that there are millions of people who are on the march and want change. But the organisers are working in collaboration with the West.

The question you should ask is: how would the West respond to a genuine uprising that was sweeping through the Arab world that caught them unawares?

There would be panic.

- A row would break out between the various US intelligence services and State Departments for not seeing this
- The CIA’s head of the Middle East would be hounded out of his job
- Republicans would be calling for Hiliary Clinton to resign
- There would be US congress people and Senators demanding military intervention to protect oil supplies and “our way of life” – indeed there would be a propaganda campaign
- There would be endless programmes in the US debating what should happen
- There would be emergency meetings among G7 heads
- NATO would be in permanent session
- The US would sign security treaties with friendly Arab states
- US bases would be set up in various friendly Arab states
- Security advisers would be flown in to help Arab states remain stable using “humanitarian means”
- State Department ministers and CIA chiefs would be in and out of Arab states on a regular basis
- We’d be told that Al Qaida is organising the rebellions
- Finance chiefs and gurus would be telling us oil-price Armageddon is around the corner
- You’d know what German leaders think about the revolutions – because they’d be on news shows telling you along with lots of other leaders
- Western media would go into panic mode
- US forces would go to Def Con 4 (second lowest level of readiness)

Instead, we get ridiculous propaganda about Libya. The West is clearly behind the removal of Gaddaffi and this so-called Arab revolution. The Left is opposed to Western military intervention but the fall for the rest of it. They would probably support military intervention by Tunisia and Egypt - which is what the West will push for.

The idea that Gaddaffi is a brutal, bloodstained dictator is ridiculous. He must be the most incompetent dictator there is.

What kind of brutal dictator appoints army generals and UN ambassadors who then resign their positions because they don't want rebellious citizens killed?

What kind of brutal dictator allows half his country to be taken over by people armed with flags and revolutionary chants?

Think about Saddam Hussein. Now he's a real brutal, bloodstained dictator.

Can you imagine telling him at the height of his powers that a bunch of people with flags, revolutionary chants, and frying pans was going to take over the oil rich part of his country?

Saddam would be helplessly laughing on the floor for the next half an hour with his bodyguards and assistants laughing with him.

After that, he wouldn't ensure you spent a night in jail for insulting him. He'd pat you the back and tell you that you gave him pleasure for a while and the next time he needed a good laugh, he'd give you a call.

Gaddaffi a brutal, bloodstained dictator - joke.


I see no sign that there is any significant fear among Western elites about these so-called revolutions.