By: SR Shearer


For some time now the United States has been engaged in the Middle East and North Africa with a process that it has labeled "CREATIVE DESTRUCTION;" to a very large extent, this process has been forced on the US by the Arab uprisings that are now sweeping through the Muslim world and threatening to RADICALIZE the area against the American New World Order System. [Please see our article, "Confronting the Inevitable Collapse of America's Client-State System in the Middle East;" please also see our articles, "What's Happening Now in Egypt" and "Libya: Lies, Lies and More Lies."]

This article examines the labyrinth of NGOs and CIA FRONT organizations through which America's elites are operating in order to co-opt the Egyptian Revolution and bend the "Egyptians masses" to their will. The maze through which this effort is being directed consists of a series of differing organization — religious, political, economic — all linked to one another in intricate keiretsu-like relationships where the same personalities appear again and again from group to group and organization to organization; the overlap is stunning. It's a huge and intricate net of organizational and personal relationships in which the same names appear in one group, disappear, and reappear again in another; sometimes they appear simultaneously in several different groups; sometimes one name will appear in a position of power and influence in one gathering, and merely as a "foot soldier" in another; then just as suddenly the positions will reverse. It's like looking at smoke rising from a fire on a hot, windless day and trying to make sense of its direction and predict the patterns which will emerge. IN ALL OF THIS, HOWEVER, ONE CAN DISCERN THE HAND OF THE CIA.

Unfortunately - at least insofar as the American elites are concerned - the Egyptian people are "catching on" to what is happening - resulting in the arrest of over 19 Americans associated with American NGOs in Egypt. The American media is doing its best to blame these arrests on the Egyptian military. But there is growing evidence that the great mass of the Egyptian people support what's happening.



On February 5, 2012. the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs indignantly reported,

"In a move former President Hosni Mubarak's regime did not dare to make, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) ordered Egyptian soldiers and police to raid the offices of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Cairo on December 30, 2011. At least 17 U.S.-based and local groups receiving foreign funding were targeted, according to activists and Egyptian state media. Among the U.S.-based groups targeted were the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the International Republican Institute (IRI) ..."; [Please see APPENDIX for information on these NGOs.]

Commenting on the same incident, the Washington Post angrily reported that -

"Nineteen Americans will face criminal charges as part of a probe of the funding of pro-democracy groups, Egyptian officials announced on Sunday, a provocative move that could deprive Egypt of crucial aid from the United States and upend one of its most important bilateral relationships.

"The targets of the investigation include will-connected American groups, among them one led by Sam LaHood, son of U.S. Transportation Secretary Roy LaHood. Sam LaHood reportedly was among those facing charges.

"U.S. officials have sternly warned Cairo in recent days that the roughly $1.5 billion in aid earmarked for Egypt this year could be withheld if the politically charged investigation isn't resolved quickly ..."

It's fairly well-known in Washington circles that Sam LaHood is clandestinely involved with the CIA. The group he heads up - the IRI - is one of the components of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). NED and the IRI engage in neoliberal "democracy" efforts previously performed by the CIA - in other words, they orchestrate the overthrow of foreign governments for Wall Street and the International bankers.


But Mark Weisbrot chuckles at all this hand-wringing insofar as the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the International Republican Institute (IRI) are concerned; he writes in the British publication Guardian:

"I have to laugh when I see the International Republican Institute (IRI) described by the international media as an 'organization that promotes democracy' (in this case, on NPR). The IRI is in the news lately because Egypt's government has put some of its members on a 'no-fly' list and thereby trapped them in the country, facing investigation and possible trial. I am wondering just how credulous these journalists and editors are: if I were to describe the Center for Economic and Policy Research as 'a magical organization that transforms scrap metal into gold', would that become CEPR's standard description in the news?

"The IRI is an international arm of the US Republican party [specifically, the neo-conservative faction of the Republican Party - see our article, "The Neo-Conservatives"], so anyone with the stomach to watch the Republican presidential debates might doubt whether this would be a 'democracy-promotion' organization. But a look at some of their recent adventures is enough to set the record straight: in 2004, the IRI played a major role in overthrowing the democratically elected government of Haiti. In 2002, the head of the IRI publicly celebrated the short-lived military coup that overthrew the democratically elected government of Venezuela. The IRI was also working with organizations and individuals that were involved in the coup. [Please see our article, "Why Washington Hates Chavez."]

"In 2005, the IRI was involved in an effort to promote changes in Brazil's electoral laws that would weaken the governing Workers party of then President Lula da Silva.

"Most recently, in 2009, there was a military coup against the democratically elected government of Honduras. The US government did everything it could to help the coup succeed, and supported 'elections' in November of 2009 to legitimize the coup government. The rest of the world - including even the Organization of American States (OAS), under pressure from South American democracies - refused to send observers. This was because of the political repression during the campaign period: police violence, raiding of independent media, and the forced exile of political opponents - including the country's democratically elected president.

"But the IRI and the National Democratic Institute (NDI) ... went there to legitimate the 'election'. But don't take my word for why they chose to participate. Here is what the USAID [a CIA front organization], part of the US State Department and the major funder of IRI and NDI activities, had to say about their role in Honduras:

'The absence of the OAS and other recognized international observation groups made NDI and IRI's assessment/observation processes more meaningful in the eyes of the international community. The recognition of a free, fair and transparent electoral process provided a strong argument to support the new government. [...] The international "assessment" conducted by NDI and the "observation" conducted by IRI, even if they did not fulfill accepted standards, partially achieved the sought-after impact'.

"Who knows what the IRI is doing in Egypt? But we know what the US government has done there: supported a brutal dictatorship for decades right up to the point where mass protests made it clear that Washington could not stop Mubarak's ouster by a real, popular, democratic movement last year.

"The IRI and NDI are core grantees of the National Endowment for Democracy, an organization that conducts activities 'much of [which]' the 'CIA used to fund covertly', as the Washington Post reported when the Endowment was being created in the early 1980s. [For a short history of the National Endowment for Democracy and its origins in the CIA, please see our article, "We Are All Being Played for Suckers."]

"These organizations will sometimes support democracy, but often do not, or are even against it. This is not because they are inherently evil, but because of the position of the United States in the world. The United States government, more than any other in the world, is running an empire. By their nature, empires are about power and control over other people in distant lands. These goals will generally conflict with many people's aspirations for democracy and national self-determination. [Please see our article on the machinations of the NED, "The AFL-CIO and Death Squads."]

"... Washington fears democracy in many countries because it will inevitably lead to more governments ... opposing other US ambitions in the region, such as its desire for military bases and alliances. Even in Iraq, where Washington brags about having toppled a dictatorship, the people had to fight the occupying authorities for the right to hold national elections ...

"This creates a vicious cycle in which hated and often repressive governments are supportive of US foreign policy, and these governments receive US support, increasing regional animosity toward the United States. In some cases, it also leads to terrorist attacks against US institutions or citizens, which is then used by our leaders to justify long or endless wars (for example, Iraq and Afghanistan). A poll of Arab public opinion by the University of Maryland and Zogby International, which included Egypt, asked respondents to 'name two countries that are the biggest threat to you': 88% named the United States ... only 9% chose Iran."



God bless you all!

S.R. Shearer
Antipas Ministries







Then make copies and take these copies out to the campuses where you live; pass them out; OR if that seems too "daring" for you right now, post them on telephone poles, the sides of buildings, on campus bulletin boards; post them in union halls, in the neighborhoods of the poor and downtrodden, near employment offices, wherever you can.

Once again, we URGE you to read (or re-read):




They are:

  • International Republican Institute

  • The Albert Einstein Institution

  • Freedom House


International Republican Institute

By: Muriel Kane

The IRI is little-known organization closely tied to the Republican Party and the Bush administration and often accused of promoting partisan policies and ideology abroad is now heavily involved in efforts to establish democratic institutions in Afghanistan and Iraq, RAW STORY has learned.

The International Republican Institute, though billing itself as an independent nonprofit unaffiliated with the Republican Party, acts essentially as a wing of the GOP. Its is chaired by party presidential frontrunner Senator John McCain (R-AZ), and Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Representatives David Dreier (R-CA) and Jim Kolbe (R-AZ) serve on its board of directors. Many of IRI's high-ranking staff members have at some point worked directly for the Bush administration.

What makes these connections troubling is that the organization, nominally dedicated to nurturing free institutions in emerging democracies, has also been associated with unscrupulous and undemocratic campaign practices both at home and overseas.

Crushing Kerry

In December 2004, IRI contracted with Tony Marsh and Lance Copsey of the media consulting firm Marsh, Copsey & Scott to set up a Baghdad Media Center on behalf of the U.S. State Department. Its stated purpose was to assist Iraqi political parties and candidates in the upcoming January elections.

Earlier that year, in January 2004, Marsh Copsey & Scott (now Marsh Copsey & Associates) had registered the domain name, which was used throughout the 2004 election for an anti-Kerry blog run by their senior account executive, Patrick Hynes. The site was heavily involved in promoting both the SwiftBoat Veterans and CBS Memos stories. It also encouraged readers to suggest other ways of discrediting John Kerry, and claimed to have inside sources of information on the Kerry campaign. Today, the blog is gone, but is still the main URL for the website of Marsh Copsey & Associates.

Until 2003, Tony Marsh and Lance Copsey had been associated with the firm of Russo Marsh & Rogers, which has since then become known for its sponsorship of a pro-Iraq War organization called Move America Forward. In 2004, MAF encouraged a campaign of intimidation to prevent theater owners from showing Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911. In 2005, it launched a "You Don't Speak for Me, Cindy" caravan to demonstrate against Cindy Sheehan. It is currently running television ads calling for the censure of former President Jimmy Carter, in retaliation against calls to censure George W. Bush.

Marsh and Copsey's association with these actions is made more troubling by the closeness of their firm's ties to the Republican Party. They list among their clients the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Senatorial and Congressional Committees, and many state Republican organizations.

Marsh Copsey's connection with IRI goes well beyond the Baghdad Media Center. IRI's annual report for 2003 lists both Tony Marsh and Lance Copsey among its volunteers for that year. After the 2005 Iraqi election, IRI's resident political director in Iraq became Marsh Copsey's director of international ventures.

Shaping elections in Iraq and Afghanistan

Marsh Copsey is not the only firm advising IRI on how to run Republican-style election campaigns. IRI's annual reports for 2003 and 2004 include among their lists of volunteers a significant number of Republican pollsters, consultants, strategists, public opinion researchers, and campaign website designers, some of whom have come under fire for unethical practices.

For example, Rob Autry and Gene Ulm are with Public Opinion Strategies, the largest Republican polling firm. POS was responsible for the "Harry and Louise" ad in the early 90's that scuttled Clinton's health insurance proposals. In 2001, it was charged with violating Virginia's polling disclosure laws, and it has also been accused of using push polls to influence elections.

Another IRI volunteer is Whitfield Ayres, a Republican strategist and pollster who often appears on television news shows presenting Republican talking points. One of his polls claimed to show that older Americans supported privatization of Social Security. Another, from 2004, indicated that 83% of Americans were satisfied with their current health insurance coverage.

These volunteers take on significance in light of the fact that in both Afghanistan and Iraq, IRI has been heavily involved in elections -- working with favored candidates and parties and conducting polls which may be intended to influence election results.

During the Afghan presidential election of October 2004, IRI's pre-election poll showed Hamid Karzai with a strong lead, and its exit poll, released immediately after the vote and well before the ballots were counted, also gave him over 50% of the vote. The British Helsinki Human Rights Group subsequently suggested that these polls might have helped head off scrutiny of an election that had initially been met with well-founded suspicions of fraud.

IRI's polls also serve to influence public opinion in the United States. A year ago, MediaMatters pointed out that the Washington Post had cited an IRI poll showing that "60 percent of Iraqis believed the country is headed in the right direction" without indicating the partisan nature of its source. In September 2004, President Bush had cited a similar IRI poll at a press conference, saying, "I saw a poll that said the right track/wrong track in Iraq was better than here in America. It's pretty darn strong. I mean, the people see a better future."

Outsourcing regime change

IRI was founded in 1983 as the result of a Reagan administration imitative to fight Communism by providing government funding to private groups -- most notably the National Endowment for Democracy -- that would promote U.S. policies in ways the government could not undertake directly. In 1991, one of the creators of the NED would be quoted as saying, "a lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." This initiative led to the creation of two organizations, the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute, associated with the two political parties.

IRI and NDI originally focused their activities on Central America and the Caribbean, but after the fall of the Soviet Union they shifted their attention to the former Communist republics of Eastern Europe. In Serbia, for example, the ouster of Slobodan Milosevic in October 2000 was carefully orchestrated, in an effort that the Washington Post has called "a curious mixture of secrecy and openness." In this effort, NDI offered its polling and organizing expertise to help develop a unified political opposition, while IRI provided a student group, Otpor, with instruction in non-violent resistance and helped it to plaster the country with anti-Milosevic stickers and graffiti.

The IRI has recently come under heavy criticism for its activities in Venezuela, Haiti, and Cambodia. In all three countries, IRI has taken a partisan role, channeling support and funding to extreme right-wing and pro-Bush parties and skewing its reporting in their favor. This is in sharp contrast with the National Democratic Institute, which reportedly works with all factions and focuses on sponsoring debates and handing out voting guides.

In April 2002, it was revealed that in the months preceding the abortive coup against Hugo Chavez, the U.S. government had funneled millions of dollars through IRI and related organizations to opposition groups in Venezuela. IRI staff members had held discussions with one of the coup leaders a few months before the coup attempt, and on the day of the coup the president of IRI issued a press release hailing the removal of Chavez from power.

IRI has also been accused of being a major factor in the violent coup which removed President Jean-Bertrand Aristide from power in Haiti in February 2004, leaving that country in a state of chaos. According to both the New York Times and Salon, IRI had spent years undermining the reconciliation process after disputed elections, counseling and funding opposition groups, and training coup leaders.

The secretive aspect to some of IRI's activities, combined with its repeated involvement in subverting left-leaning politicians and parties, creates the appearance that it may be acting as one more tool in the Bush administration's arsenal for regime change by any means available. The recent increase in IRI's federal funding -- which almost tripled, from $26 million to $75 million, between 2003 and 2005 -- adds grounds to this suspicion.

IRI's ties to the current administration are strong, to say the least. Its current president left the organization from 2001 to 2004 to serve as Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. A former IRI regional director served under him as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State in the same bureau. IRI's general counsel became the deputy director of economic policy for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad in 2003. One former IRI staff member was Director of Governance for the CPA, while another, who was Senior Advisor for Governance, has now returned to IRI as executive vice president.

Karl Rove's dirty tricks alma mater

Tony Marsh and Lance Copsey are not the only names associated with both IRI and Karl Rove-style campaign dirty tricks. Several of IRI's volunteers have lectured or taught seminars at Morton Blackwell's Leadership Institute, the venerable training-ground for dubious Republican campaign practices, which Salon has described as teaching "that with sufficient organization, the act of voting becomes less a basic right than a tactical maneuver." Karl Rove himself is an alumnus of the Leadership Institute, as is Jeff Gannon. So is Patrick Hynes, the Marsh Copsey employee who ran

Among the IRI volunteers with a Leadership Institute connection is Ron Nehring, the vice-chairman of the California Republican Party, who says in his online biography that he "has volunteered to teach campaign strategy and tactics to others at campaign seminars throughout the United States and Canada, and even in such troubled areas as the Middle East and Haiti, through the International Republican Institute and the Leadership Institute."

Nehring, a protégé of Grover Norquist who was recently the subject of an article at RAW STORY, is also head of The Project for California's Future, which regularly partners with the Leadership Institute to provide campaign trainings. The board of advisors of that group includes Kerri Houston, another IRI volunteer. Houston is also on the board of directors of GOPUSA, the website which credentialed Jeff Gannon as a White House reporter.

At least two other IRI volunteers -- fundraiser Paul Pelletier and Newt Gingrich's former chief legislative assistant, Nancy Bocskor -- have taught at the Leadership Institute as well.

These connections with the Gingrich-Norquist wing of the Republican Party point up IRI's role in promoting a radical right-wing ideology. Though IRI is largely supported by federal funding, it receives additional contributions from right-wing foundations, large corporations (including major oil firms, telecommunication companies, and defense contractors), and Republican lobbyists. Representatives of these same corporations and foundations serve on its board of directors, and it appears that their extreme free-market ideas may be more influential on the organization than the traditional American love for open institutions that it nominally espouses.

On to Tehran?

At present, the International Republican Institute appears to be slowly gearing up to participate in the Bush administration's current initiative to promote regime change in Iran by supporting Iranian pro-democracy activists. However, some of IRI's alumni and associates have already been on the move.

In 2004, a former IRI staff member, J. Scott Carpenter, became head of the State Department's Middle East Partnership Initiative, with the responsibility "to reach out to Iranian democrats inside the country to see who would be willing to accept outside support in their efforts to reform and change the Islamic republic." Just this March, Carpenter participated in the creation of an unprecedented Office of Iranian Affairs, whose purpose is "to facilitate a change in Iranian policies and actions."

More surprisingly, three members of the Serbian student group Otpor showed up in Dubai last summer, running training sessions in which they tutored Iranian activists in the same kinds of tricks that IRI had taught them five years earlier during the push to overthrow Milosevic. In a recent article, Asia Times described these workshops as "highly secretive" and said that "stress was laid on the importance of ridiculing the political elite as an effective tool of demythologizing them in the eyes of the people."

Asia Times further quotes an Iranian analyst as saying, "As I gather, the idea was to fund and train activists to be agents provocateurs along the lines of the Otpor movement in Serbia. Their job was to utilize various techniques, such as anti-government graffiti etc, to embolden the student movement and provoke a general government crackdown, which could then be used as a pretext to 'spark' a mass uprising in Iran that appeared to be spontaneous and indigenous."

Asia Times does not identify the "Americans who appeared to supervise the course and whose affiliation remained unclear throughout." However, it seems certain that whether or not they were formally associated with IRI, the attitudes and methods they were passing along to the Iranian dissidents derive directly from those of, the Leadership Institute, and the International Republican Institute.


The Albert Einstein Institution:
Non-violence According to the CIA

By: Thierry Meyssan

Gene Sharp

Non violence as a political action technique can be used for anything. During the 1980s, NATO drew its attention on its possible use to organize the Resistance in Europe after the invasion of the Red Army. It's been 15 years since the CIA began using it to overthrow inflexible governments without provoking international outrage, and its ideological façade is philosopher Gene Sharp's Albert Einstein Institution — and it has been used to great affect from Lithuania to Serbia, Venezuela and Ukraine.

Unknown to the public, Gene Sharp formulated a theory on non violence as a political weapon. Also he first helped NATO and then CIA train the leaders of the soft coups of the last 15 years. Since the 50s, Gene Sharp studied Henry D. Thoreau and Mohandas K. Gandhi's theory of civil disobedience. For these authors, obedience and disobedience were religious and moral matters, not political ones. However, to preach had political consequences; what could be considered an aim could be perceived as a mean. Civil disobedience can be considered then as a political, even military, action technique.

In 1983, Sharp designed the Non Violent Sanctions Program in the Center for International Affairs of Harvard University where he did some social sciences studies on the possible use of civil disobedience by Western Europe population in case of a military invasion carried out by the troops of the Warsaw Pact. At the same time, he founded in Boston the Albert Einstein Institution with the double purpose of financing his own researches and applying his own models to specific situations. In 1985, he published a book titled "Making Europe Unconquerable " [1] whose second edition included a preface by George Kennan, the Father of the Cold War. In 1987, the association was funded by the U.S. Institute for Peace and hosted seminars to instruct its allies on defense based on civil disobedience. General Fricaud-Chagnaud, on his part, introduced his "civil deterrence" concept at the Foundation of National Defense Studies. [2]

General Edward B. Atkeson, well-known by CIA director, [3] incorporated the Institute to the American interference stay-behind network in allied States. To focus on the moral issues of an action helped to avoid all doubts on the legitimacy of an action. Therefore, non violence, recognized as good-natured and assimilated to democracy, offered a suitable aspect to antidemocratic secret actions.

In 1989, when the Albert Institution became well known, Gene Sharp began to advice anticommunist movements. He participated in the establishment of Burma's Democratic Alliance - a coalition of notable anticommunists that quickly joined the military government - and Taiwan's Progressive Democratic Party - which favored the independence of the island from communist China, something U.S. officially opposed. He also unified the Tibetan opposition under Dalai Lama and tried to form a dissident group within PLO so that Palestinian nationalists would stop terrorism [4] (he made the necessary arrangements with Colonel Reuven Gal, [5] director of the Psychological Action division of the Israeli armed forces, to train them secretly in the American Embassy in Tel Aviv).

Srdja Popovic (left), Serbian leader of the Otpor movement, Gene Sharp (center) and Robert Helvey

When CIA realized how useful could the Albert Einstein Institution be, it brought Colonel Robert Helvey into play. An expert in clandestine actions and former dean of the Embassy's Military Attachés Training School, "Bob" took Gene Sharp to Burma to educate the opposition on the non violent strategy for criticizing the cruelest military junta of the world without questioning the system. By doing this, Helvey could identify the "good" and the "bad" opponents in a critical moment for Washington: the true opposition, led by Mrs. Suu Kyi, was labeled as a threat to the pro-American regimen.

«Bob's» job was easily done. Since he was military attaché in Rangoon from 1983 to 1985 and helped to structure the dictatorship, he knew everybody. By playing a double game, Colonel Helvey simultaneously directed a classical action of military support to Karen resistance: by providing weapons and controlling a limited guerrilla, Washington wished, indeed, to maintain the military junta under pressure.

Since that moment, Sharp has always been present everywhere American interests are put at risk. In June 1989, he and his assistant, Bruce Jenkins, went to Beijing, two weeks before Tiananmen events. They were both expelled by Chinese authorities. In February 1990, the Albert Einstein Institution hosted a Conference on Non Violent Sanctions that brought together 185 experts of 16 countries under Colonels Robert Helvey and Reuven Gal. This marked the beginning of an international anticommunist crusade to involve peoples in non violent action.

Professor Thomas Schelling, [6] well known economist and CIA consultant, joined the Administrative Council of the Institution whose official budget was still stable though it was also funded by the International Republican Institute (IRI), one of the four branches of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED/CIA). [7]

At the same time, Baltic countries proclaimed their independence but, after a test of endurance with Mijail Gorbatchov, they postponed their decision for 2 or 3 years to negotiate their terms. In October 1990, Gene Sharp and his team traveled to Sweden and trained several Lithuanian politicians in the organization of a popular resistance against the Red Army. Months later, in May 1991, when the crisis broke out and Gorbatchov deployed his special forces; Gene Sharp was the adviser of Sajudis separatist party (Perestroika Initiative Group) and remained close to Vytautas Landsbergis. In June 1992, independent Lithuania Minister of Defense, Audrius Butkevicius, hosted a symposium to thank Albert Einstein Institution's key role during the independence process of the Baltic countries.

When the U.S began its rearmament in 1998, [8] the Albert Einstein Institution became part of an expansionist strategy. It provided ideology and technique to Otpor («Resistance»), a group of Slobodan Milosevic's young opponents. Simultaneously, it intervened in Kosovo province to train Ibrahim Rugova's LDK, but it turned useless for Washington during the Kosovo war. Then, Otpor quickly became a choice to overthrow Milosevic who was very popular for resisting NATO. Colonel Helvey trained Otpor's leaders through seminars hosted at Hilton Hotel in Budapest. Money was not a problem to overthrow Europe's last communist government. The person in charge of commanding the operation was agent Paul B. McCarthy, discreetly settled at Moskva hotel in Belgrade until Milosevic's resignation in October 2000.

In September 2002, Gene Sharp went to The Hague to train the members of the Iraqi National Council who were preparing themselves to return to Iraq, along with the American army.

In September 2003, it was also the Albert Einstein Institution who advised the opposition to question the electoral results and go on demonstrations to force Eduard Shevardnadze's resignation [9] during the «revolution» of the roses in Georgia.

When the CIA-organized-coup against Venezuela failed in April 2002, the State Department counted again on the Albert Einstein Institution which advised the owners of enterprises during the organization of the revocatory referendum against President Hugo Chávez. Gene Sharp and his team led the leaders of Súmate during the demonstrations of August 2004. As done before, the only thing they had to do was questioning the electoral results and demanding the resignation of the president. They managed to get the bourgeoisie out in the street but Chavez's popular government was too strong. All in all, international observers had no other choice but to recognize Hugo Chávez's victory. [Please see our article, "The AFL-CIO and Death Squads" which details the coup that was organized by th CIA against the Chavez government in Venezuela."]

Gene Sharp failed in Belarus and Zimbabwe for he could not recruit and train in the proper time the necessary amount of demonstrators. During the orange «revolution» in November 2004, [10] we met again with Colonel Robert Helvey in Kiev. Finally, we must point out that the Albert Einstein Institution has begun to train Iranian agitators

But, why Albert Einstein? It is an unsuspicious name. Gene Sharp's first book on Gandhi's methods began with a preface signed by Albert Einstein, though the book was written in 1960, five years after the genius's death. Therefore, Albert Einstein did not write anything for Sharp's work. All that Sharp did was reproducing an article on non violence written by the scientist.

  1. Making Europe Unconquerable: The Potential of Civilian-based Deterrence and Defense. Taylor & Francis Publishing House, London, 1985. Its second edition included a preface by George F. Kennan, Ballinger Publishing House, Massachusetts, 1986.

  2. General Georges Fricaud Chagnaud had been military attaché at the Embassy of France in Washington, and some time later he was appointed Chief of NATO's French military mission.

  3. General Edward B. Atkeson is currently a CSIS expert and manager of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO).

  4. Mubarak Awad, one of the agents formed by Sharp, is currently (January 2005) in charge of the American aid sent to Indonesia after the tsunami.

  5. Nowadays, Colonel Reuven Gal is deputy head of the National Security Council of Israel in charge of molding Palestine society.

  6. In March 2004, Thomas Schelling was one of the drafters of the Copenhagen Consensus. Sponsored by The Economist, this document questioned the UN Millenium Program and the Kyoto Protocol. Mr. Schelling formulated a theoretical model which suggested that economic growth is the best way to combat global warming for, in the future, it should guarantee the development of the necessary techniques to solve the problem.

  7. Thierry Meyssan : «The Networks of "Democratic" Interference», Voltaire (text in French), November 21, 2004.

  8. In 1998 and despite the lack of enemy, the Congress forced President Clinton to implement a rearmament policy.

  9. See Paul Labarique : «Les dessous du coup d'État en Géorgie», text in French, Voltaire, January 7, 2004.

  10. See Emilia Nazarenko: «Moscow and Washington confronting each other in Ukraine», Voltaire (Text in French), November 1st, 2004. This article was published by Voltaire before the first part of the presidential elections and described the organization of the pretended spontaneous movement of the following weeks.


On Freedom House and the CIA

By: Adrienne Pine

Adrienne Pine (left)

NOTE: Adrienne Pine is a well-known researcher who analyzes the mechanisms supporting empire and the daily usurpations of democracy there and in the United States. She examines the non-profit industrial complex, the militarized and corporatized academy, diverse actors and institutions in the U.S. and Honduran governments, and the Honduran resistance movement in order to better understand how structures of violence prevent democratic processes from taking hold. Pine has been described as "a one-woman wrecking crew against the golpistas in Honduras and their handlers, paymasters, apologists and lackeys in DC" and sees militant anthropology as a key factor in overthrowing the corporatocracy. She is based in Washington, DC, where she learns from and teaches anthropology to the fabulous students at American University.

In a recent article she published on Freedom House she was accused of not providing enough documentation that it was a CIA FRONT operation. This is her answer to that criticism.

"Oops! I called Freedom House a CIA front without providing extensive documentation and pissed off a reader who works for Soros and formerly for USAID. Indeed, one of the reasons critics of U.S. imperialism are brushed off is that we are at times incautious in our quick ascriptions of things like widely interlocking memberships and boards, funders, and similar actions to intentional and directional (rather than coincidental) commonality of purpose. And one of the characteristics of blog writing and activist media is that it permits for urgent writing, like warning the Honduran resistance movement about neocon organizations trying to co-opt it through 'human rights' funding, without the wait (or prestige) of a refereed journal article. The urgency of solidarity, unfortunately, does not often permit for multiple edits, which in my case always and without fail consist of warnings to not write so angrily. That said, my angry incautious writing has proved quite beneficial in numerous instances because of the responses it provokes, and what those in turn uncover. In this case, some great arguments about Freedom House, and some new leads. One very useful assessment of Freedom House's position vis-a-vis the U.S. government and the need to accurately identify elements of U.S. imperialism, reached me in email form from Jeremy Bigwood. I publish it here with his permission:

"Here are my two cents: the genius of US imperialism is that it operates through many distinct entities that function at various intensities through different channels - and often independently of each other once they get going on a particular project. 'These distinct entities often come together and decide on a strategy around a big table which includes the NSC and, if it is important enough, the President himself. A given policy may or may not originate from Congress. When a policy is decided upon, all of the agencies do their distinct thing — sometimes in close coordination with each other and sometimes not. It depends on what is on the agenda. Sometimes the agencies meet repeatedly to check the status of some program. Sometimes they don't. While it can be as lethal as any of the military entities, the CIA does not call the shots and is usually just one of many USG actors in any given situation. Please remember that the CIA is a relatively small part of the whole operation. The biggest USG entity is DoD — an entity that owns about 86% of all USG assets and is able to act behind the scenes very easily because there are so many other entities to focus on and also because of its relative complexity and opacity.

"Freedom House looks like a CIA front because it is doing its part to achieve the aims agreed to at some NSC meeting, something that the CIA would also be doing. Stylistically, FH usually does things by twisting the facts in a way reminiscent of the CIA's Psychological Operations of the Cold War period (what was called 'Psy Ops' then has been largely taken over by DoS, USAID, NED and their subordinate entities like FH and it is now called 'democracy promotion' among other Orwellian monikers). FH is a practiced spinmaster. It has been doing this for a long time and its human resources department knows how to pick naïve people to do its bidding. FH people are pros, just like CIA officers are.

"However, I should point out that the misidentification of the elements of US imperialism is something that continually plagues the Latin American Left and impairs its credibility. For instance, Evo used to rail against the DEA for coca eradication in the Chapare in Bolivia. True, the DEA really did have a role in drug control in Bolivia, but very little in eradication: it was DoS' INL that was in charge of eradicating coca. But it was just easier for him to say "DEA' than get into the complicated details of the internal structures of DoS entities. This is OK for propaganda down south, but if we want to put all of the beast back into its cage, we here in Washington have to be able to correctly identify all of its body parts.

"In other words, US imperialism is a very, very complicated beast — much more complicated than, say, Japanese imperialism of the first half of the last century. It is also very adaptive, although less and less so... Hopefully we will be able to push it back into its cage so that it becomes an enlightened member of the world's nations. It is worth a try."

We need your help to spread the word concerning Antipas Ministries and the eschatological viewpoint it represents; WE NEED YOUR HELP BECAUSE WE DO NOT "LINK" WITH OTHER SO-CALLED "CHRISTIAN" WEBSITES which are, for the most part, "in the tank" insofar as their loyalty to the United States is concerned - a loyalty that has made them partners in the BLOODY trail the American military has left in its TERROR-RIDDEN rampage throughout the world, as well as making them partners in the abject poverty that American corporations have imposed on the peoples and nations the American military machine has ravaged - A BLOODY, TERROR-RIDDEN RAMPAGE THAT HAS TO A LARGE DEGREE BEEN CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF THE "PRINCE OF PEACE." [Please see our articles, "The Third World as a Model for the New World Order," Inside the American New World Order System" and "The American Empire: The Corporate / Pentagon / CIA / Missionary Archipelago."]



© Antipas Ministries