Illegitimate Transfer of Inalienable European Rights via Convention(s) & Supranational Bodies Establishment of Sovereignty-Usurping Supranational Body Dictatorships Enduring Program of DEMOGRAPHICS WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of PSYCHOLOGICAL WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of European Displacement, Dismemberment, Dispossession, & Dissolution
No wars or conditions abroad (& no domestic or global economic pretexts) justify government policy facilitating the invasion of ancestral European homelands, the rape of European women, the destruction of European societies, & the genocide of Europeans.
U.S. RULING OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR TO SALVAGE HEGEMONY [LINK | Article]
Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? —Who wants to make free people free?
Associates of Russian President Vladimir Putin were revealed to have hundreds of millions of dollars stashed away in offshore accounts.
Published 5 April 2016
Pepe Escobar connects the dots.
Calling out around the world; time to put on your made in Ecuador Panama hat and frantically start dancing to the ultimate limited hangout leak.
And if you believe in the purity of intentions of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) at the center of the leak, I’ve got a made in Shenzhen Panama hat to sell you (disclosure: I never was, and never will be, a member of the ICIJ).
The Washington-based ICIJ gets its cash and its "organizational procedure" via the Exceptionalistan-based, Orwellian-named Center for Public Integrity. The funds flow mostly from the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Endowment, the Rockefeller Family Fund, theKellogg Foundation and the George Soros-owned Open Society.
Then there is Eastern Europe-based partner organization OCCRP,an even more Orwellian outfit self-styled as playing some sort of progressive, alternative media role. OCCRP is funded by Soros and USAID.
And finally there’s this fictional land named Panama – a certified U.S. vassal. Absolutely nothing of real substance happens in Panama without a green light by the United States government. Or, as an international tax lawyer told me, “you have to be an idiot to stash money in Panama. You cannot flush a toilet there without the Americans knowing about it.”
This sets the scene for the Panama Papers leak – a massive hoard of 11.5 million documentsallegedly leaked from someone inside offshore heaviesMossack Fonsecato the center-left, NATO-friendlySuddeutsche Zeitung newspaper in Munich and then shared by the ICIJ with selected mainstream media partners.
Even without a smoking gun, a case can be made this alleged most massive leak ever was obtained by – what else – U.S. intel. This is the kind of stuff the NSA excels at. The NSA is able to break into virtually any database and/or archives anywhere; they steal “secrets;” and then selectively destroy/blackmail/protect assets and “enemies,” according to USG interests.
Absolutely nothing of real substance happens in Panama without a green light by the United States government.
That’s the essence of a limited hangout sold to public opinion as a serious corruption investigation. And that’s where Western corporate media enters the scene, protecting whatever 0.00000001 percent honcho is caught in the net, as well as sacrificing some disposable pawns.
So we have over 300 reporters pouring over hundreds of thousands of document/files for over an interminable year with, miraculously, no leaks whatsoever; just for a bunch of corporate mainstream media hacks meticulously cherry picked stories and decide what is “newsworthy." Western alternative media would have investigated the data without sparing anyone; but it would be out of the question to grant them access.
What’s already certain is that the full extent of the Panama leak will never be known. Even the by now exceedingly pathetic The Guardian admitted, on the record, that "much of the leaked material will remain private". Why? Because it may – inadvertently and directly – implicate a gaggle of Western 0.00000001 percent multibillionaires and corporations. All of them play the offshore casino game (although not necessarily in Panama.)
So the Panama Papers, stripped to the bone, may reveal themselves essentially as an infowar operation by the NSA – targeted mostly against “enemies” (as in the BRICS nations) and selected disposable pawns; a weaponized psyops posing as an 'activist leak', straight from the Hybrid War playbook.
Step on the Monster Truck
A who’s who of wealthy/powerful players has been directly targeted in the Panama Papers, from the – demented – King of Saudi Arabia to former Fiat/Ferrari stalwart Luca de Montezemolo, from Lionel Messi to (unnamed)Chinese Communist Party officials and the brother-in-law ofChinese President Xi Jinping.
Extra-juicy element is provided by the presence of Alaa Mubarak – the son of the deposed Egyptian snake; Ayad Allawi, the butcher of Fallujah and former U.S. occupation prime minister; Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif (a Saudi protégé, so he must get offshore advice as well); and Dov Weisglass, the butcher of Gaza and former advisor to Israeli Prime Ministers Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert (this one already convicted of corruption.) These are all disposable.
We find in the list not only Middle Eastern racketeers but also the token “respectable” European – from Iceland’s Prime Minister (already forced to resign) to David Cameron’s father Ian. And some players that might be considered Exceptionalistan’s friends, such as vulture fund-friendlyArgentina President Mauricio Macri and chocolate heavyweight cum Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, who has a lot of funds parked in the British Virgin Islands.
Predictably, particular emphasis is on BRICS members – from those mysterious Chinese to Indian companies. As far as Brazil is concerned, there may be a healthy counterpoint; the presence of notoriously corrupt leader of the lower house Eduardo Cunha; his Swiss accounts had surfaced after the HSBC leaks, now some more showed up on the Panama Leaks.
Still to be explained is a juicy Brazilian-related angle; whether the Panama Leaks are directly related to the fact that Ramon Fonseca, 50 percent of Mossack Fonseca, was dismissed as president of the Panameñista Party last month because of Operation Car Wash – which targets mostly the ruling Workers’ Party in Brazil. The Panama Papers are in fact a Monster Truck, global version of Car Wash.
Lula, predictably, is not on the Panama list – to the despair of the Exceptionalistan-supported regime changers in Brazil, many of them (media barons, bankers, businessmen) featured on the previous HSBC leaks. Regime-Changers-in-Chief, the Globo media empire, are also not on the Panama leaks, although they profit from a certified offshore racket.
Syria was always bound to be a key target. Much of Western corporate media “newsworthy” stories now focus on “Assad’s fixer”Rami Makhlouf, described in U.S. diplomatic cables as Syria’s “poster boy for corruption” and under U.S. sanctions since February 2008. Such a convenient target. Yet “poster boy” happened to be quite sheltered by HSBC as well.
Putin Did It
And so we finally get to the key target of Monster Truck (in Brazil’s Car Wash they are Lula and President Rousseff). It’s got the requisite BRICS angle and it’s a dream spin; cue to virtually every major Western corporate media headlineblaring that Vladimir Putin has stashed US$2 billion offshore.
The problem is he didn’t. Putin is guilty by association because of his “close associates” Arkady and Boris Rotenberg’s alleged ties to money laundering. Yet three “incriminating” emails in the files happen not to “incriminate” them, or Putin.
And then there’s cellistSergey Roldugin, a childhood friend of Putin’s. Here’s the – politically filtered – spin by the ICIJ:
“The records show Roldugin is a behind-the-scenes player in a clandestinenetwork operated by Putin associates that has shuffled at least US$2 billion through banks and offshore companies. In the documents, Roldugin is listed as the owner of offshore companies that have obtained payments from other companies worth tens of millions of dollars. … It’s possible Roldugin, who has publicly claimed not to be a businessman, is not the true beneficiary of these riches. Instead, the evidence in the files suggests Roldugin is acting as a front man for a network of Putin loyalists – and perhaps for Putin himself.”
What about rephrasing it as, “the evidence in the files suggests Lionel Messi is acting as a frontman for a network of football loyalists trying to evade the rape of Argentina by U.S. hedge fund vultures friendly to new President and offshore account holder Mauricio Macri”?
The juiciest bit is that Moscow knew all along another Hybrid War offensive chapter was imminent, days if not weeks before Panama went viral.
Make America Great Again
Offshore bank accounts are not intrinsically illegal. Quite a few though involve dodgy money, or at least provide the euphemistic “low-tax environment” fundamental to the very wealthy.
OPINION:
The New Silk Roads and the Rise of the 'Chinese Dream'
It’s not an accident that the Panama Papers unveil connections to several dozen firms and individuals who are prominently featured in U.S. sanctions blacklists. That configures the Panama Papers as even more of a limited hangout; the real Papers would be the Cayman Papers or the Virgin Island Papers. That’s where most of the in-the-know park their money (not to mention Luxembourg). Adding to the hilarity factor, David Cameron suddenly woke up to the need to stop British overseas territories – and Crown dependencies – being used by the wealthy to park their untaxed fortune.
It’s never going to happen. The so-called international banking/financial system is a demented casino. It’s not only 8 percent; Hong Kong players tell me as much as 50 percent of global wealth may currently be parked, undisturbed, in untaxable offshore havens. If a fraction of these astonishing funds would be taxed, governments right and left would be paying their debts, investing in infrastructure, launching round after round of sustainable growth, and a productive spiral would be in motion.
And that leads us to the cherry in the corruption cake; how come there are no Americans in this limited hangout leak? Of course there are none. Panama is for suckers. Too obvious. Too rakish. Too crude. Ergo, forget about The Cayman Papers.
As for foreigners in-the-know, we just need to go back a mere three months ago to this Bloomberg piece, where Andrew Penney, Managing Director of Rothschild & Co., spells it all out; the U.S. “is effectively the biggest tax haven in the world.”
The circle is finally squared; Panama is revealed as the patsy – mere collateral damage in this limited hangout Monster Truck operation. Domestic tax haven providers, such as Rothschild, are the real deal. Make America great again? It already is – as the top tax shelter for hardcore dodgy money had to be...a monster Panama: Exceptionalistan itself. Now dance, suckers.
Corporate Media Gatekeepers Protect Western 1% From Panama Leak 54
3 Apr, 2016
Whoever leaked the Mossack Fonseca papers appears motivated by a genuine desire to expose the system that enables the ultra wealthy to hide their massive stashes, often corruptly obtained and all involved in tax avoidance. These Panamanian lawyershide the wealth of a significant proportion of the 1%, and the massive leak of their documents ought to be a wonderful thing.
Unfortunately the leaker has made the dreadful mistake of turning to the western corporate media to publicise the results. In consequence the first major story, published today by the Guardian, is all about Vladimir Putin and a cellist on the fiddle. As it happens I believe the story and have no doubt Putin is bent.
But why focus on Russia?Russian wealth is only a tiny minority of the money hidden away with the aid of Mossack Fonseca. In fact, it soon becomes obvious that the selective reporting is going to stink.
The Suddeutsche Zeitung, which received the leak, gives a detailed explanation of the methodology the corporate media used to search the files. The main search they have done is for names associated with breaking UN sanctions regimes. The Guardian reports this too and helpfully lists those countries as Zimbabwe, North Korea, Russia and Syria. The filtering of this Mossack Fonseca information by the corporate media follows a direct western governmental agenda. There is no mention at all of use of Mossack Fonseca by massive western corporations or western billionaires – the main customers. And the Guardian is quick to reassure that “much of the leaked material will remain private.”
What do you expect? The leak is being managed by the grandly but laughably named “International Consortium of Investigative Journalists”, which is funded and organised entirely by the USA’s Center for Public Integrity. Their funders include
Ford Foundation
Carnegie Endowment
Rockefeller Family Fund
W K Kellogg Foundation
Open Society Foundation (Soros)
among many others. Do not expect a genuine expose of western capitalism. The dirty secrets of western corporations will remain unpublished.
Expect hits atRussia, Iran and Syria and some tiny “balancing” western country like Iceland. A superannuated UK peer or two will be sacrificed – someone already with dementia. [Comment: ... LOL]
The corporate media – the Guardian and BBC in the UK – have exclusive access to the database which you and I cannot see. They are protecting themselves from even seeing western corporations’ sensitive information by only looking at those documents which are brought up by specific searches such as UN sanctions busters. Never forget the Guardian smashed its copies of the Snowden files on the instruction of MI6.
What if they did Mossack Fonseca database searches on the owners of all the corporate media and their companies, and all the editors and senior corporate media journalists? What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on all the most senior people at the BBC? What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on every donor to the Center for Public Integrity and their companies?
What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on every listed company in the western stock exchanges, and on every western millionaire they could trace?
That would be much more interesting. I know Russia and China are corrupt, you don’t have to tell me that. What if you look at things that we might, here in the west, be able to rise up and do something about?
And what if you corporate lapdogs let the people see the actual data?
Only we don't get to see this one & the controlled media will cherry pick, just using the information to target the ruling Western oligarchy handmaiden-enforcer governments' official, designated enemies.
Vlad can do no wrong in my eyes and neither can Russia.
Look at what the Western crooks have been up to over the last 70 years: exploitative capitalist agenda wars; illegal wars; invasions; murder of millions; enforcing crippling, murderous sanctions; dropping depleted uranium bombs; dropping atomic weapons; serial CIA coups; serial regime change; serial destruction of entire countries; mass surveillance of entire countries, including their own; decades of CIA collusion with corporate media; CIA funding political parties in sovereign countries; non-stop corporate media & CIA propaganda; Western censorship & political policing violations (including rape of activist women by undercover police, Britain); Western murder of political dissidents (USA); British government refusal to execute arrest warrants for (alleged) war criminals allied to the West (Israelis), but politically persecuting Aussie journalist-publisher, Assange, held in arbitrary detention in violation of international laws, and heldWITHOUT CHARGE for over five and a half years.
I left out the Americans unsigning themselves from the Rome Statute, and therefore out of the reach of the International Criminal Court, so that they cannot be held to account for the WAR CRIMES THEY AND THEIR ALLIES (YES, THEY'RE COVERED, TOO) HAVE COMMITTED & INTEND TO COMMIT IN FUTURE; the Americans blackmailing aid and trade dependent nations to grant Americans immunity from being held accountable for commission of war crimes; the Americans passing into law that they SHALL USE MILITARY FORCE against any nation that seeks to bring their citizens (or allies! ... hello?) before international courts of law (meanwhile these same war criminal hypocrites and liars target Serbian politicians, in propaganda spectacles to distract from their own illegal bombings and war crimes -- the scum).
The Guardian's pathetic, and so is that phony warmonger US oligarchy funded International Consortium of Whore Journalist.
What kind of idiot leaks anything to the mainstream media or its representatives? Hello ... anyone remember what happened to Israeli nukes whistleblower: Mordechai Vanunu?
Bet this isn't even a real leak: it's probably a CIA offering to shape public opinion.
Britain violates human rights, disregards international law, denies lawful political asylum granted to Assange by Ecuador;
its Crown Prosecution Service advises Sweden that this matter is not being handled by the British authorities as just 'another extradition request' & the CPS advises Sweden NOT to interview Assange in Britain;
so Britain and Sweden can deny journalist Julian Assange legal defence;
as the aim of both Britain and Sweden is to enforce extradition of Julian Assange to Sweden, in order to facilitate 'storage' & extradition of Assange to the US (which has had a sealed US secret Grand Jury indictment against Assange from at January 2011, when this was confirmed), once the US has built its 'case'.
Britain subverts both democracy and justice,
but you wouldn't think so from this shameless political propaganda from Hugo Swire,
who is accusing Ecuador of exactly what Britain has prevented:
justice for journalist Julian Assange, target of US-Anglo-Allied POLITICAL PERSECUTION:
After well over 5 years of detention and political persecution in Britain
UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGA) concludes that Julian Assange has been held arbitrarily, in violation of his rights
...
Predictably Britain 'disputes' the UNWGA decision:
Brits are intent on maintaining a hold on Assange so he can be transferred to the Americans,
who have spent all these years mounting a 'case' against Assange and WikiLeaks.
like the man says, it's international law that Britain signed up for & took part in for 16 months:
Hey, UN puppets ...
this is Hugo, the British Foreign & Commonwealth Office Minister of State guy ...
making light of Britain violating democracy, justice & international law to politically persecute a brave, award-winning Aussie journalist-publisher who exposed US-British and allied war crimes
...
that involved at least
one ILLEGAL WAR (Iraq):
While the US-Anglo Evil Empire Twins and their battery of human rights mouthpieces make all the right media noises about the 'oppressive' Maldives government ...
... that's permitted convicted terrorist Mohamed Nasheed to travel to London for medical treatment ...
... the Evil Empire conspirator hypocrites
deny journalist Julian Assange medical treatment,
deny Assange liberty, deny Assange rights
and subject Assange to over 5 years arbitrary detention,
at a cost of millions of pounds to the British taxpayer:
Maldives lambastes Amal Clooney for 'compelling tale'
Ali Naafiz, Haveeru Online Jan 19, 2016 - 08:55
Government lashed out Monday at international human rights lawyer Amal Clooney after she claimed that democracy was "dead" in the Indian Ocean island.
In an exclusive interview with NBC News Friday evening, Clooney took aim at political repression, human rights abuse and rising jihadism in the Maldives, where a USD2 billion tourist economy is fuelled by pristine beaches, blue lagoons and coral reefs.
"Democracy is dead in the Maldives," said Clooney, in her first interview in the US.
"Literally, if there were an election now there would be no one to run against the president. Every opposition leader is either behind bars or being pursued by the government through the courts."
Defending the administration of her half-brother Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom, foreign minister Dhunya Maumoon told Reuters that Clooney had "spun a compelling tale" but it was not true.
"My appeal to the rest of the world is to have a good understanding and not be persuaded purely by charm-filled Amal Clooney when she goes and gives some of these stories," she said.
In her interview, Clooney, who is part of the international legal team defending former president Mohamed Nasheed, warned that "democracy is dead" in Maldives, insisting that visitors need to be told of the human rights violations in the popular tourist destination as they seek targeted sanctions against government officials.
Nasheed was jailed for 13 years in March on terror charges related to the arrest of Chief Criminal Judge Abdulla Mohamed when he was still president in 2012.
In addition to the former president’s local attorneys, he is represented by a high profile international legal team which includes legal heavyweights such as London-based human rights lawyer Amal Clooney, her fellow British attorney Ben Emmerson and her Washington based co-counsel Jared Genser.
Nasheed had sought permission to go abroad for a surgery on his back, but Correctional Service had repeatedly denied the request insisting that the microdiscectomy surgery could be done in the Maldives.
However, in an apparent U-turn, foreign ministry announced on twitter Saturday the government had granted permission to Nasheed to travel to the UK to undergo surgery, at his request. He departed to the UK on Monday for medical treatment.
Government’s U-turn on Nasheed came in the wake of visits by the Indian foreign secretary and two senior Sri Lankan ministers which also coincides with a visit by the Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office of UK Hugo Swire who arrived earlier Sunday.
Indian foreign secretary Jaishankar arrived in Maldives Monday afternoon on a one-day official visit as a special envoy of the Indian prime minister. President Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom briefed Jaishankar on the political developments in the Maldives and secured the regional superpower's backing in domestic and international affairs.
Sri Lankan foreign minister Mangala Samaraweera and finance minister Ravi Karunanayake arrived in Maldives Wednesday evening on an official visit.
The jailing of former president Nasheed and other politically motivated trials have made the Maldives the subject of mounting international criticism.
International pressure was further fuelled after a UN panel ruled Nasheed's incarceration illegal.
The former president’s lawyers have stepped up their efforts to impose targeted sanctions against the Maldives and its leadership, following the ruling by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention late September declaring his imprisonment as arbitrary.
In the latest development, the European parliament passed a resolution last month condemning the human rights abuses of President Yameen's government, and calling for targeted sanctions to be imposed on his officials and supporters in the business community. http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/65715
Moral mercenary Amal Clooney works both sides of the human rights contest Date February 1, 2016 | Comments 143
Paul Sheehan
Amal Clooney is a moral mercenary. She's a lawyer. As the fiancée and then wife of George Clooney, she was thrust into a global spotlight, where she has been cast as a moral paragon, a human rights crusader for the downtrodden.
Clooney is also Amal Alamuddin, Oxford-educated, fee-charging lawyer who works both sides of the human rights contest.
None of these selections from Clooney's resume should be read as an affront to her character. All accused are entitled to a robust legal defence.
Acting for the defence of her latest client, Clooney has engaged in some questionableadvocacy. It is one thing to proclaim your client's innocence, it is quite another to misrepresent the facts.
In an opinion piece published in The Guardian on April 30 last year, Clooney wrote that one of her clients, a former president of the Maldives, Mohamed Nasheed, had been removed from power by an armed coup: "His presidency was cut short in February 2012 when he was forced to resign at gunpoint."
This is a central plank in the case that Nasheed is a martyr for democracy.
But the Commission of National Inquiry that examined Nasheed's departure from office found no evidence that he was deposed in a coup. The commission was advised by a former judge of the New Zealand Court of Appeal, a former judge of the Singapore Supreme Court, and a professor of human rights law at the University of Ottawa.
The commission found Nasheed had voluntarily tendered his resignation at 1.43pm on February 7, 2012, and that his resignation was not coerced. His replacement was sworn in later that day by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, in accordance with the constitution.
The next day, Nasheed, a former journalist, told the media: "I was forced from office at gunpoint."
The commission found this inflammatory claim to be a fabrication: "Rather, it is evident that President Nasheed [had] lost the support of the coalition … which had brought him to power … There was no illegal coercion or intimidation nor any coup d'état. The commission received no evidence supporting or to substantiate these allegations."
Also damning is a taped phone conversation in which Nasheed, on the night of his resignation, calls for violence from his supporters:
"If we are able to find people willing to fight, we should let them loose. Find some young people in Male who are ready to fight the police. I am not sure we can get them. But I want to let them loose on the police tonight."
In other words, there is no substance to the foundation of the martyrdom narrative that Clooney has been propagating.
Among critics of her conduct isDr Michael Kennedy of Western Sydney University. Kennedy, a former police detective, has spent the past three years delivering a degree program in the Maldives for police, customs and immigration officers.
He believes Clooney has used her celebrity to engage in media manipulation:
"An inquiry by the Commonwealth secretariat supported none of Nasheed's claims that he was forced to resign after a military coup. It's seldom reported that in his pursuit of an old enemy, a Supreme Court Justice, he ignored the constitution and bypassed the Police Service. He and his legal team are now calling for sanctions against the Maldives. This could cause widespread human rights abuses by way of hardship and unemployment."
Nasheed, who last March was convicted of contentious and dubious charges of terrorism, is now in London to receive medical treatment.
He has been given a 30-day release from prison. He has said he will not return. Instead, he has used his time in London to traduce the Maldives as a country rife with Islamic fundamentalism, a claim calculated to inflict damage on a tourist-based economy.
Clooney has chimed in: "It may be famous for the pristine holiday beaches … but the Maldives has taken a dark authoritarian turn."
Kennedy, among others, disputes this as legal hyperbole. Nasheed's very freedom in London undermines his argument of sinister repression.
Clooney herself has taken work from the dark, authoritarian side.Her most notorious client wasAbdullah Senussi, responsible for the murder or imprisonment of thousands of people as head of internal security for the Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi.
He was convicted, in absentia, of having a key role in the bombing of a passenger jet in 1989 in which 170 people died. He is implicated in the 1988 bombing of an American airliner over Lockerbie, Scotland, in which 259 people were killed.
Another client of Clooney was King Hasan bin Isa al Khalifa of Bahrain. She acted as a legal adviser to the king during the Bassiouni Commission of Inquiry into the government's suppression of an uprising by Shiite Muslims in Bahrain in 2011.
The commission was set up by the king. It found that 46 people, including five members of the security forces, had been killed, that police had used excessive force, and 559 people had claimed they were tortured while in custody.
None of this should be read as an affront to her character. All accused are entitled to a robust legal defence. Barristers are ethically bound to mount a robust defence.
Last year, Nasheed's legal team filed a case with the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, an advisory body to the United Nations Human Rights Council. The Working Group issued an opinion stating that Nasheed's incarceration was a breach of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The government of the Maldives rejected this legal opinion. It also contends it is not bound by this opinion.Nasheed, by abrogating the terms of his release, has in effect freed himself.But he has done so with the help of a government he claims is oppressive.
There are no heroes in this story. The Maldives imbroglio serves as a reminder not to be blinded by stardust.
That same UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has ruled that Julian Assange has been arbitrarily detained ... and the silence is deafening.
Well, save for the British bullsh*t that first came out.
No media bleating about 'injustice', 'oppression', 'death of democracy' ... or even the oppressive British DENIAL OF MEDICAL TREATMENT to journalist, Assange.
And no sanctions, of course.
No European Union demands for sanctions against the British. No UN finger-wagging.
But the bastards are hardly going to sanction themselves.
A U.S. “alphabet soup” agency-sponsored themed revolution in the Maldives, an island nation in the Indian Ocean comprising twenty-six atolls, stands to plunge the nation, heretofore considered a tropical paradise for tourists, into the same kind of chaos and civil unrest now seen on the streets of Libya, Egypt, and Syria. Maldives is smaller in comparison to the nations of the Middle East where the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), International Republican Institute (IRI), National Democratic Institute (NDI), and George Soros’s Open Society Institute (OSI) have sponsored themed revolutions that have all resulted in civil unrest and a entrance of extremist Wahhabi Salafists into political power. However, the small size of Maldives provides a much clearer picture of how the aforementioned Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)-sponsored “soft power” aggressors managed to turn paradise into another center of unrest in the Muslim world.
In the case of the Maldives, the road to civil strife began in 2005 when USAID- and OSI-sponsored democracy” manipulation groups took root in the countryupon the legalization of opposition political parties by the government of President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom. Serving as president for thirty years, Gayoom was seen by the international human rights network of non-governmental organizations as a dictator ripe for removal. The Western-sponsored NGOs settled on Mohamed Nasheed, a Maldivian opposition leader who had lived in exile in Britain – with the support of the British government — and Sri Lanka and who returned to Maldives in 2005, as their favorite candidate for president.
In preparation for the first direct presidential election for president in 2008, outside “democracy manipulators” descended on Maldives, a country that had become popular with the Soros network because of global climate change. Maldives, which is threatened by rising sea levels, became a cause célèbre for the carbon tax and carbon cap-and-trade advocates.
Nasheed was the 2008 presidential candidate of the Maldivian Democratic Party against President Gayoom’s Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party. In the first round of voting, Gayoom received a little over 40 percent of the vote in the first round to the 24 percent of Nasheed’s and his vice presidential running mate, Mohammed Waheed Hassan. To defeat Gayoom in the second round, Nasheed, obviously with the encouragement of his foreign “democracy” advisers, sought and received the endorsement of four other opposition parties, including the Saudi- and United Arab Emirates-financed Salafist Adhaalath (Justice) Party. Adhaalath is an ideological partner of the Muslim Brotherhoods of Egypt and Syria. In the second round of the election, Nasheed, with the support of the other four opposition presidential candidates, defeated Gayoom 54 percent to 46 percent.
Nasheed was immediately embraced by the world’s glitterati community of NGOs and celebrities, including carbon tax-and-trade advocate Bill McKibben of 350.org and the crowd who gathered at the Sundance Film Festival to view a sycophantic film about Nasheed called The Island President. Nasheed was called the “Mandela of the Maldives” by those celebrities whose knowledge of Maldives did not extend beyond the nation’s Wikipedia entry. In October 2009, Nasheed and his Cabinet pulled off a pre-Copenhagen climate change conference publicity stunt by holding the world’s first underwater Cabinet meeting. Nasheed and eleven of his ministers, wearing scuba gear, convened the meeting twenty feet under the surface of the Indian Ocean. Nasheed was a huge hit among the celebrity contingent at the December 2009 Copenhagen summit.
Nasheed was selected by Time magazine at the top of their “Leaders & Visionaries” list of “Heroes of the Environment.” The United Nations awarded Nasheed its “Champions of the Earth” award. Foreign Policy magazine, co-founded by the late Samuel Huntington, a chief ideologist for the neo-conservative pabulum of a “Clash of Civilizations” between the West and Islam, named Nasheed as one of its top global thinkers.
Nasheed took on as his close adviser and communications assistant Paul Roberts, a British national. In what alienated his Salafist supporters, Nasheed also opened diplomatic relations with Israel, invited Israeli surgeons to Maldives amid fears they would begin harvesting human organs for Israeli clients, met with Israeli government officials, agreed to allow direct air links between Israel and Maldives, invited Israeli trainers into Maldives to advise Maldivian security forces, and failed to ensure that Maldives voted for Palestine’s full admission to the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) during the organization’s general assembly meeting in Paris on October 31, 2011. Maldives was absent from the vote.
Maldivian opposition parties, particularly the Salafist Adhaalath Party which left Nasheed’s coalition, did not buy Nasheed’s government’s weak explanation about the Palestine vote.By the end of 2010, the four other political parties in Nasheed’s Cabinet had left and Nasheed’s government was accused by the opposition of lacking transparency. The trademark yellow neckties and shirts worn by Nasheed and his supporters and the yellow Maldivian Democratic Party flags waved by Nasheed’s supporters were yet another indication that Nasheed’s “revolution” was another “themed revolution” concocted by the Soros/NED network of NGOs and think tanks in Washington, London, and New York.
Just as other Soros / NED-installed regimes began to violate the constitutions of their respective nations, including Georgia and Ukraine, Nasheed was no different. On December 10, 2010, the Maldivian Supreme Court ruled that Nasheed’s cabinet ministers could not serve without the approval of parliament. Nasheed responded by declaring the Maldivian courts were controlled by supporters of ex-president Gayoom and on January 16, 2012, Nasheed ordered the military to arrest Abdulla Mohammed, the Chief Justice of the Criminal Court.
Counter-protests were organized by Maldives opposition parties and were backed by the police. After the military clashed with the opposition protesters and police, several military members defected and joined the protesters.
Faced with the opposition and police/military uprising, Nasheed resigned the presidency on February 7. Later, Nasheed and his British adviser Roberts claimed that Nasheed was ousted in a coup d’etat. The U.S. State Department demanded that Vice President Mohammed Waheed Hassan, who assumed the presidency and opposed the arrest order of the Chief Justice, form a government of national unity with Nasheed’s supporters. Hassan refused and India, which, in the past, has intervened militarily in Maldives to put down attempted coups, remained silent. The Soros/NED global glitterati, including the Soros-funded “Democracy Now” program hosted by Amy Goodman and partly-funded by Soros, featured Roberts on an interview in which Gayoom was described as a thug and who was trying to re-assume power. Of course, the Soros propaganda program made no mention of Nasheed’s repeated violations of the Maldivian constitution.
As with the destabilization of Iraq, Egypt, and Libya, the first target for alleged Islamist radicals after the ouster of Nasheed was the destruction of priceless museum artifacts. Unknown men broke into the Chinese-built Maldives National Museum in Male, the capital, and smashed the delicate coral and limestone pre–Islamic Maldivian Buddhist statues on display.
The yellow flag of Nasheed’s political party.
The rise of Salafists and Muslim Brotherhood adherents in the new Maldivian governmentparallels what occurred in Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Tunisia after their themed revolutions.
The Maldives were destabilized by the West at the same time that the Egyptian government charged 43 CIA-linked NGO personnel, including Americans, Britons, Serbs, and others working for IRI, NDI, and NED, with possessing a secret plan, including maps, to divide Egypt into an Israeli-dominated Sinai state, a Coptic state extending from Alexandria in the north to Asyut in the South, a Berber-dominated Islamic state based in Cairo, and a black African Nubian state in the south. [Comment: what? Is this guy serious, or is he nuts? It was all good, until he got to this insane portion. ... lol
Wow, I just looked it up ... author's not nuts. It's a real story: here.]
There now may be an attempt by the West to split up Maldives. In 1957, the British established the Gan airbase on the southernmost atoll of Addu and insisted on 100-year base rights on Seenu Atoll. After Maldives Prime Minister and President Ibrahim Nasir adopted a nationalist foreign policy, the British backed a secessionist movement in the southern atolls where the British bases were located that declared the short-lived United Suvadive Republic in 1959. After the collapse of the secessionist republic in 1965, the British bought the southernmost atoll in the Chagos-Laccadive chain of atolls from Mauritius and established the British Indian Ocean Territory. The inhabitants of the Chagos Archipelago island of Diego Garcia were forcibly removed to Mauritius and other Chagos islands and the United States established its strategic military base on the island of Diego Garcia. Maldives never recognized Mauritian claims over the Chagos atolls or the British Indian Ocean Territory. With neo-con interference in Maldives now coming to fruition, secessionist movements in the southern atolls may, once again, gain ground to ensure unfettered U.S. and British control over Diego Garcia and expansion of U.S. and British military facilities to the Addu atoll and, perhaps, further north in the Maldives chain.
Source: Strategic Culture Foundation on-line journal www.strategic-culture.org.
EU-NATO IMPERIALISM ❌ 
