What’s the real story behind this most recent revolution in Egypt? Looking at it on the surface, from the viewpoint being handed to us by the mainstream media it’s hard to make out a clear picture, especially since much of the information we’re being given seems contradictory. There is some key evidence that is being obscured by the official line, once you see that evidence and connect the dots it all makes perfect sense, and that’s what we’re going to do in this video.
Now the variable that must be looked at first and foremost if you want to understand the events unfolding in Egypt is the geopolitical importance of the region, especially in relation to oil.
Egypt is the home of both the Suez canal, and the SUMED petroleum pipeline. 7.5% of world Sea trade passes through the Suez canal, about 20% of this traffic is oil tankers and 6% is natural gas. The SUMED pipeline carries approximately 2.4 million barrels of oil a day. As of 1955 two thirds of Europe’s oil passed through Egypt. More recent figures are not readily available, but they may in fact be higher.
The Suez canal and the SUMED pipeline are listed as world oil transit chokepoints on the U.S. energy information administration’s website (eia.gov). The Strait of Hormuz, which is controlled by Iran is also listed . Make a mental note of that, because it is a very important variable in this equation.
Collectively the Suez canal and the SUMED pipeline are the only two direct routes for transporting crude oil from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean. If ships were unable to navigate through the Suez Canal or if the SUMED Pipeline were closed, oil tankers would have to be diverted around the southern tip of Africa, the Cape of Good Hope, adding approximately 6,000 miles to transit, increasing both costs and shipping time dramatically. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), shipping around Africa would add 15 days of transit to Europe and 8-10 days to the United States. This would translate directly into higher oil prices.
This was demonstrated clearly as oil prices rose above $100 a barrel in July due to fears that the unrest in Egypt could interrupt supply.
Whoever controls Egypt controls these chokepoints, and because of this the country has been the subject of numerous power games, and intrigues over the past century. One of the most notable of which was the Suez crisis of 1956 in which France, Britain and Israel initiated a war with Egypt after Egypt nationalized the canal. This crisis, also known as the “Tripartite Aggression” started when the Israelis invaded Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, forcing Egypt to defend itself. The English and the French then declared the resultant fighting a threat to the canal and entered the war on Israel’s side. This strategy called the Protocol de Sèvres had been preplanned and agreed upon in discussions between the three countries in France earlier that year.
We are taught in schools that the age of colonialism ended sometime in the early 1900s but this really isn’t true. Colonialism is still very much alive, it’s just taken a new form. What we have today is covert colonialism.
The United States and its allies have become very adept at toppling governments that are not cooperative, and installing puppets to do their bidding.
The first documented example this was the U.S. and British backed coup in 1953 which removed the democratically elected prime minister Mohammed Mossadeq from power in Iran (after he nationalized Iran’s oil fields) and installed the Shah in his place. The Shah of course promptly let the U.S. and British oil companies back in.
Just one problem, the Shah was a dictator, and he was very unpopular. The Iranian people don’t particularly like being ruled by puppets, so they overthrew the Shah in 1979 during the Iranian revolution. The government that replaced him has had this crazy idea that Iranians should run Iran, and the U.S. should mind their own business. Of course for Washington this is unacceptable especially since approximately 20% of the worlds oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran itself is sitting on the world’s third largest oil reserves.
The United States has been trying to find a way to get a regime change in Iran for some time now. For many years the focus was on building up a trumped up case against Iran’s nuclear energy program, claiming that they were working on building a bomb. This hasn’t gotten traction internationally or domestically, largely due to the fact that the U.S. government no longer has any credibility on these types of issues. You can only cry wolf about weapons of mass destruction so many times before people start to roll their eyes. Furthermore the CIA and Mossad have come forward stating that Iran hasn’t even made the decision to build a nuclear weapon, much less start.
So Washington was forced to take a more indirect route to get to Iran, and that indirect route is through Syria. Syria is Iran’s closest ally, and they have a mutual defense agreement, so if the U.S. can find an excuse to enter Syria it will draw in Iran, and then they’ll have their excuse for their war.
This isn’t just theoretical. The U.S. has been arming the Syrian rebels covertly for some time now, and now they are beginning to openly arm them. Iran is responding by sending troops to Syria. Russia and China have also taken Syria’s side in the conflict with Russia scheduled to send them S-300 anti-aircraft missiles.
The crisis in Syria relates directly to the situation in Egypt, but in order to see how, we have to take a step back.
Hosni Mubarak former president of Egypt was widely viewed as an American puppet. He had assisted the U.S. in the Gulf War of 1991 and in return America, the Arab states of the Persian Gulf, and Europe forgave Egypt around $20 billion of debt. This perception that Mubarak’s regime was under American control was reinforced by the fact that while he was in power Egypt was the second largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid (Israel being the largest of course).
Though Mubarak had protected U.S. interests for many years, in the final decade of his rule he began to push back on several key issues. Among these were his refusal to send troops to Iraq to assist in the 2003 invasion and his rejection of the U.S. nuclear weapons umbrella for Egypt in 2009.
The U.S. doesn’t like it when their puppets push back, so they began covertly funding opposition groups to take Mubarak out of office. This effort culminated in the uprising of 2011.
This doesn’t mean that the uprising, or the emotion driving it was fake. The Egyptian people were genuinely angry, their discontent was real. The United States just channeled it to get the regime change they desired.
This would seem like a risky maneuver for the U.S.; to take down a somewhat cooperative regime and leave the replacement up to chance. However the simple fact of the matter is that it wasn’t really left to chance. The Egyptian people weren’t in charge of the transition after Mubarak fell, the military was, and the Military, with Hussein Tantawi (commonly known as Mubarak’s poodle) at the helm, put their support behind Mohammed Morsi, who was in reality just an American puppet of another flavor.
Many people were fooled by this political sleight of hand, because they believed that Mubarak was the root of the problem, and the illusion of change temporarily eased the public’s discontent.
This technique isn’t new or novel in any way, in fact it’s the standard mechanism of control in so called Western democracies as well. New puppets are ushered in periodically through elections while the real ruling class remains thoroughly entrenched. That’s benefit of using a figurehead: their disposable.
Now Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood may have had their own agenda, they had their own reasons for seeking power, but the price they paid for their installment was their support of the U.S. campaign against Syria.
Egyptian people however, began to catch on quickly. They didn’t particularly want their country to be a vassal of the United States, nor did they like the direction Morsi was taking Egypt domestically, so they rose up, and took to the streets in record numbers. The protest in July of 2013 were the largest in recorded history. Thirty million people showed up, this number was especially astounding because Egypt only has a population of 82 million.
This was a true popular uprising, and it was fully capable of toppling the Morsi regime by itself without the assistance of the military. However if that had happened the outcome would have been unpredictable, and Washington would have lost all leverage in the situation. The only way to avoid this was to have the military intervene preemptively, and remove Morsi from power. By doing so the military once again was positioned to control the transition and therefore influence the replacement.
None of this really makes sense until you account for one crucial variable in the equation. While the puppets that are presented to the public as leaders are replaceable, the real source of Washington’s influence is positioned within the Egyptian military, and the military hasn’t lost any power in this crisis, in fact it has strengthened its position. The military’s move against Morsi was widely interpreted as a sign that they are allied with the people. Everyone seems to have forgotten that it was the military that put Morsi into power in the first place. He was their pick.
And now the military has a new pick ElBaradei.
Just last week Reuters quoted a source close to the Egyptian military high command as saying that ElBaradei was their first choice and sure enough ElBaradei was put forward as one of the top candidates to lead the interim government. In the end he secured the role of vice President though his nomination was temporarily put into doubt due to rumors that he may be Washington’s pick for the job.
Now of course ElBaradei supporters are doing their best to deny his connections to western powers, but his resume speaks for itself. ElBaradei served on the Board of Trustees of the International Crisis Group,
George Soros sits on the executive committee of the International Crisis Group along side CFR member Morton Abramowitz and Zbigniew Brzezinski is listed as a senior advisor.
ElBaradei has also been directly endorsed by the the Council on Foreign Relations, arguably the most powerful and corrupt globalist think tank in the world.
Furthermore, just this past February ElBaradei was actively working to get Egypt to accept a large IMF loan tied to structural adjustments and austerities.
Just his eagerness to bring in the IMF tells us everything we need to know. IMF loans with the strings they attach are trojan horses used to bring countries under Western control by saddling them with unpayable debt. For more information on how IMF and world bank loans are used as weapons do a google search for confessions of an economic hit man.
Now the details are changing by the minute and it may be that an entirely different puppet is put forth through elections in the end, one that doesn’t have any publicly traceable connections to the U.S. or NATO but make no mistake, the neo-colonialist will not just stand by and just let the Egyptian people choose their own course, control of the Suez canal and the SUMED pipeline is too important. Either a new Western puppet will be installed, or there will be more interference, and the situation could deteriorate into a civil war. One way or another this drama isn’t over.
If the Egyptian people don’t want another U.S. puppet, the military can’t be allowed to run the transition, all remnants of the old regime’s leadership in the armed forces must be retired from service, and every politician with connections to the U.S., NATO or their globalist front groups needs to be removed from the running. This is the only way the Egyptian people are going to have a chance at self determination.
If you’d like to understand the real stakes of this conflict please watch “The Road to World War 3”.
Suez canal, SUMED pipeline and Strait of Hormuz as chokepoints: http://www.eia.gov/countries/regions-topics.cfm?fips=wotc&trk=p3
The Protocol of Sevres documents: http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/dept/scwmss/projects/suez/ms-eng-c-6168.html
U.S. Funded the 2011 uprising: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/world/15aid.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Why the U.S. funded the uprising: Mubarak refused to go along with 2003 invasion: http://acpss.ahram.org.eg/eng/ahram/2004/7/5/STUD8.HTM
Morsi picked by military in 2011 uprising: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/138623/joshua-stacher/why-the-generals-back-morsi
Morsi backed U.S. agenda to topple Syria: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/30/egyptian-leader-iran-syrian-rebels
U.S. Toppling Syria: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323419604578569830070537040.html
Military running transition again: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/03/us-egypt-protests-idUSBRE95Q0NO20130703
ElBaradei was the Military’s top pick: http://www.thestar.com.my/News/World/2013/07/04/ElBaradei-tops-list-to-head-Egypt-government–sources.aspx
And he got an important position: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/09/mohamed-el-baradei-vice-president_n_3567139.html
ElBaradei viewed as a western puppet: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/07/2013775214936989.html
ElBaradei connected to International Crisis Group: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_ElBaradei#International_Crisis_Group
(this page has been removed however I have a screenshot of it) http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/about/~/link.aspx?_id=007F025EA86D4399B7F8C7BEB488046E&_z=z
Zbigniew Brzezinski senior advisor at the International Crisis Group http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/about/~/link.aspx?_id=AFAAD992BC154C93B71B1E76D6151F3F&_z=z
ElBaradei was pushing for IMF loan: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/02/12/uk-egypt-elbaradei-economy-idUKBRE91B1J720130212
U.S. was pushing the same loan: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/24/usa-egypt-imf-idUSL2N0DB13M20130424
War criminal and globalist lapdog Tony Blair defends the Egyptian military’s decision: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/07/egypt-army-morsi-tony-blair