US Protests: Blueprint For A (Colour) Revolution?

I've been following the events in the United States, with special interest in the evolution of the protest: what began as a protest against police brutality has turned into the a national (intended worldwide) protest for the rights of black people.

But one question arises as distant observer: is the evolution of the protest "natural"? Or is there "somebody" behind it?

The first question is why this time? Unfortunately other black men have died in the hands of the police or white men. From my point of view, the murder of Ahmaud Arbery, a black jogger, was much more infurating. Why this time is different? It is true we have seen other protests throughout the history of the US, but never of this dimension. Could it be the trail of the Covid-19? Could it just be "I can breath" the last straw? It could perfectly be, society is unpredictable.

What has made me come to the serious conviction that there is "somebody" is the behavior of the corporate media. I don't speak about minimizing the dark side of the protests (the riots or the looting), but about the active promotion of the protests. CBS ("White silence on social media: Why not saying anything is actually saying a lot", "White silence on social media not going unnoticed") or Washington Post ("This movement is not anarchy. It could push America to be a better nation", ""Defund the police" is a call to imagine a safer America. We should answer it") are just a microscopic sample of the opinion articles where the corporate media has promoted (not informed about or analyzed) the protests. These are not about fighting racism (something we all agree on), but about criminalizing white people, or even supporting the defund the police movement, which is the culmen of cynicism coming from the elites. Media's soft approach on the "defund the police" slogan gives me the creeps, because I don't believe even for one second that they think it's a good idea... So what's their game?

But also, and this is the most important, these protests resemble suspiciously the "colour revolutions" we have seen in some not-aligned countries.

As an analyst defined it (or defined the Russian visions about it), colour revolutions are the "new US and European approach to warfare that focuses on creating destabilizing revolutions in other states as a means of serving their security interests at low cost and with minimal casualties" [source].

It is interesting to notice that some of the main organizations behind the protests have been supported by the same foundations that supported some of these colour revolutions. The most notorious case is George Soros' foundation, which has funded the Black Lives Matter movement [Politico][The Washington Times]. Soros was one of the figures behind the Ukraine's "orange revolution", as he himself admitted: "I set up a foundation in Ukraine before Ukraine became independent of Russia. And the foundation has been functioning ever since and played an important part in events now" [CNN], and also intervined in Georgia's "rose revolution" [Wikipedia]. Ah, and Soros' foundation was advocating for "police reduction" already in 2016 [OSF].

Another key player would be the US' deep state (what Eisenhower called the 'military-industrial complex'). Here is a very interesting piece on Obama's Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland communications with Soros' team to discuss, among other issues, "EU visa liberalization for Ukraine and Georgia" [The Hill], which seems to me an absolute interference in EU issues. And here is an article about the involvement of the CIA in Ukraine's coup., and here Nuland's leaked call  discussing who should be in Ukraine's new government [BBC].

I don't think that the goal of the movement is to remove Trump. I think the main goal is to warn: to warn Trump's supporters and voters: "do not re-elect Trump, or this is what will happen". And it may also be a blueprint for an actual revolution in case of Trump's victory.

Egypt is moving... But towards where?

The Egyptian revolution will be studied in the future. That is an evidence. But not only because it will tell the story of how a dictator was overthrown or survived a revolution (which seems quite unlikely).

But also it will be studied because, although we can't see it now in the march and in the protests, there are two diverging forces, mainly conflicting, despite now they walk together.

The forces are the liberals on one side, and the islamists on the other. It is quite undeniable that the liberals will try to establish a european-alike democracy, whilst the islamists (mostly the Muslim Brotherhood) will try to establish something different, probably a islamist republic.

In the forthcoming events, the egyptian army will have a decisive leadership or role, it may become the judge between them.

We are witnessing an amazing series of revolutions in the muslim world. But they bring us old fears and doubts; what we should do, support a dictator, or support democracy, even if it can lead to a rise of islamism?

The big problem is that, undoubtedly we have been feeding the egyptian (and other countries) islamisms by supporting dictators.

Internet Revolutions

After the release of the Wikileaks cables, there was much controversy about the inminence of a cyber-war, that would confront the Government of the USA and its allies and the Wikileaks supporters. That "war" was not so, but a series of attacks to some companies that helped the US administration to financialy strangle Wikileaks.

But the collateral effects of the release of the cables has been undeniable: the fall of dictaro Ben Ali in Tunisia, and now the events that are taking place in Egypt and Yemen. These dictators have survived too many years, witht the support and complicity of the western governments, that thanked their help in the war against Al-Qaeda with silence about the crimes that they repeatedly commited in their countries.

But, hasn't this helpend the rise and growth of the islamists movements that, ironically, have presented themselves as "freedom fighters"?

On the other hand, we have the use that the promoters of these popular revolution have made of the new technologies proves that these are dangerous weapons for all fascists of the world (and not only in distant countries, but also in Europe and America).