We've all been watching the melt-down in the Middle East and the bizarre meddling of the West in general, and America in particular, backing "rebels" in their grizzly and brutal attempts to overthrow the "moderate authoritarian" regimes. We all saw the wickedly cackling Hilary Clinton gloating over Qaddafi's murder. Granted, Qaddafi was no gentleman, but given the revelations about his financial and monetary plans for Libya, and how he was actually spending that nation's treasure to help its people, it's little wonder he ran afoul of the oligarchs of the West. The Iraq mess is well-known, and the Syrian one, as well.
I confess in Syria's case almost complete befuddlement. The geopolitical objectives seem clear, but, for the effort, paltry in comparison for what might be gained by a change from yet another "moderate, secular, authoritarian" regime like Assad's, and the head-chopping butchery of the Western-sponsored "rebels." The geopolitical goal, I suspect, is to pry loose the last tenuous Russian toeholds in the region, and we can fully expect that after Syria is settled - if it ever is - the next domino on the West's hit list will be, of course, Iran. I get that the West is desperately trying to set up Huntington's "clash of civilizations", a new post Cold War bogeyman to demonize, and a radicalized Islamic world would fit the requirements nicely, much more nicely then the uncooperative Russians, with their shared European and "Judeo-Christian" culture ever did.
But all along, I've sensed that at some profound and visceral level that the interest of the Anglosphere oligarchs in the region lies at a much deeper level, a level transcending the vicissitudes of geopolitics, energy policy and politics, petrodollars, or all the conventional explanations found in the types of journals that people like Henry Kissinger of Zbigniew Brzezinski like to read. I sense that the involvement has much to do with the region that lies at the ultimate root of what we call western civilization, and of the indications of technological sophistication in High Antiquity that its antiquities indicate.
Which brings us to Egypt... to Giza, as it were, the premier symbol of Egyptian antiquities. Egyptian antiquities are not, of course, restricted to Giza. There is Sakkara, Heliopolis, Memphis, Edfu, Luxor... but say the phrase "ancient Egypt" and the image that will pop instant and principally to the mind of the hearer are the pyramids of Giza.
Why the unrest in Egypt...beyond the stupidity of the Obama Administration, which never saw a radical Islamist regime it didn't like, in pushing for the ouster of Mubarek? What's the goal? Egypt has no appreciable oil supplies or reserves; it has little to offer on the spectrum of geopolitical concerns save position.
But it does have antiquities.... lots of them. I have long suspected that one of the deeply hidden agendas for Western Meddling in the region is precisely to seek and gain control of key antiquities, and also to remove key antiquities from public view and scrutiny. Let it be remembered that even under Mubarek, Egypt moved, inexplicably, to wall off the Giza compound, ostensibly in an effort to "secure" the site against vandals and terrorists. I suspected then, and suspect now, that the Egyptians found something, and that they weren't sharing. I have made no secret that I suspected antiquities were a deeply hidden agenda of the Anglosphere in the invasion of Iraq: kick the French and Germans out, and take over the sites. Then the Baghdad Museum looting occurred, "American" soldiers were seen going in and out of the building and removing things....a story broken by - coincidentally? - Der Spiegel. Then we learned the museum looting had all the hallmarks of "an inside job." But by whom?
So back to Egypt:
Egypt may not have been sharing its recent antiquities discoveries, and where ancient high technology or indications thereof might be concerned, I suspect the western oligarchs pull no punches: out with Mubarek, and, with careful placement of agents provocateur, a few riots, and well-placed "looters," and antiquities can "disappear."
Of course, I grant you that this is all high octane speculation once more, speculation that, if one remains focused on this story alone, and does not view it in the context of the strange stories of Giza antiquities that preceded it, nor in the context of the Baghdad Museum looting, vastly exceeds the evidence. But when one does view this story in those contexts, then the lineaments of a disturbing outline begin to emerge, the outlines of a possible real, though very covert, "antiquities war" being fought beneath the guises of "radical" versus "moderate" Islamicists, behind the veil of geopolitics, oil, and petrodollars.
See you on the flip side.
(My thanks to Mr. P.T. for bringing this to our attention)