Order Through Chaos: Who Wants to Set the World on Fire?
Recent global events give me the distinct impression that those at the top of the pyramid of political and economic power want to see as much trouble in the world as possible. Assuming that to be the case, I find it very strange and counter-intuitive. I mean, you would think that self-interested leaders would prefer to maintain a status quo that provides them with so many privileges and luxuries that the rest of us only dream of. For them to act in ways that appear to stimulate revolutions, economic collapse and regional or global wars is extraordinary, at least to me, because it jeopardizes their position. But maybe it’s my fault for forgetting that most at the top think and feel very differently than "the 99%", and that they have trouble with emotions that come naturally to the rest of us. When you’re motivated by thrill-seeking and a thirst for power that knows no bounds, empathy and aversion to conflict don’t exactly play a part in your worldview. Granted, they have their own psychopathic standards, but, nevertheless, something about their schemes does not sit right with me.
By now you are aware of the American-made trailer of a mysterious movie called The Innocence of Muslims that appeared on YouTube and depicted the prophet Muhammad as a murderous paedophile, and that is said to be the reason for recent riots and demonstrations across the Muslim world against the United States which resulted in the death, among others, of Chris Stevens, the US ambassador in Libya. Let us point out, first of all, that this simplistic explanation overlooks decades of imperialistic intervention of the US in the Middle East, either indirectly or directly through military involvement in Iraq, Libya and currently Syria; its support for dictators and regimes in the region notorious for the abuse of human rights, such as Israel and Saudi Arabia; and its demonization of Arabs and Muslims in general. It also ignores the very low economic and social standards of living that are common in the Middle East - and much of the world - that are a direct result of the US ’management’ of its areas of influence. By sweeping all this history and social context under the rug, the Western audience is left to conclude that Muslims are irrational extremists.
Take Yemen as an example, the US embassy of which was one of those stormed during recent protests. Did you know that 10 million Yemenis are starving as a result of a food crisis, while 267,000 children are facing life-threatening levels of malnutrition? The US considers this hungry people threatening enough to frequently target it through drone attacks. Would that not make you feel motivated enough to riot against your aggressors at the slightest opportunity?
So if a YouTube trailer had anything to do with rioting, it was that it provided an excuse - the straw that broke the camel’s back by adding insult to injury - rather than being the primary reason for discontent. Whoever was hoping to provoke Muslims seems to have gotten much more than they bargained for; the anger was already simmering and had manifested during the so-called ’Arab Spring’ against local tyrants. Now it is directed against the enablers of such tyrannies.
Let’s consider the trailer itself. It is an American production but nobody knows if the movie it was supposed to be promoting even exists. If it doesn’t, then this confirms that it was created for the sole purpose of provocation and providing a simple narrative for the media to repeat. No one seems to agree on the name of the director. According to some reports, it was made by Sam Bacile, a California real estate developer, Israeli Jew and American citizen. There is also speculation that Bacile is a member of Egypt’s Orthodox Coptic Christian diaspora in the US. That suggestion seems to imply that as a Christian in Egypt he wouldn’t get along with Egyptian Muslims - in spite of the fact that Egypt is one of the most tolerant countries in the Middle East when it comes to religion. Other versions point to Terry Jones, a ’preacher’ who has made anti-Islamic gestures in the past and who is said to have links to CIA and Mossad. The latest version is that Sam Bacile’s real name is Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, and he is no director but a producer. The real director, we are told, is Alan Roberts, who has a history of making soft porn and whose real name is either Robert Brownell or Robert Brown.
Get all that? Don’t worry if you didn’t. I think that was the whole intention: to create such obscure rumours about the origins of the trailer that no one could find its real origin. That in itself should be suspicious, just as suspicious as the fact that a YouTube video managed to stand out from the rest and be spread wide enough to upset people in multiple countries. Excuse me for pointing out the obvious, but there must be millions of YouTube videos tailored to insult every sensitivity on the planet, in one way or another, yet they don’t trigger mass revolt. In addition, it appears that the initial stimulus for the riots was not exactly spontaneous. We have the following from the case of Libya:
[A] U.S. counterterrorism official said the Benghazi violence was "too coordinated or professional" to be spontaneous. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the incident publicly.
Parliament speaker Omar al-Houmidan suggested the attack might have been planned, saying the mob "may have had foreign loyalties" - an apparent reference to international terrorists. "We are not sure. Everything is possible," he said.
Another source adds:
An intelligence source on the ground in Libya told Fox News that there was no demonstration outside the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi prior to last week’s attack -- challenging the Obama administration’s claims that the assault grew out of a "spontaneous" protest against an anti-Islam film.
"There was no protest and the attacks were not spontaneous," the source said, adding the attack "was planned and had nothing to do with the movie."
The source said the assault came with no warning at about 9:35 p.m. local time, and included fire from more than two locations. The assault included RPG’s and mortar fire, the source said, and consisted of two waves.
[...] The Libyan president also said Sunday that the strike was planned in advance.
I am not alone in suspecting that the trailer was part of an intelligence psy-op and that the attack in Benghazi was initiated by agents provocateurs, allowing for the probability that the unrest was carried on for legitimate grievances of a social, economic and political nature. Assuming this is the case, the question becomes: why would the Powers That Be deliberately bring trouble on their heads? Is it their intention to set the world on fire?
Read the full article at: sott.com