William de Berg, Why the U.S. “Color” Revolution Failed—The Wrong Color?

William de Berg

“Color Revolution” is a term that is used to denote the use of color symbolism to define revolutionary movements designed to topple governments around the world.  Some of the most famous of these are the orange revolution in the Ukraine, the rose revolution in Georgia, the saffron revolution in Burma, and the various green revolutions throughout the Arab Spring. The U.S. and other western governments have played an important role in fomenting and planning many of these revolutions and, when successful, the typical outcome of these revolutions is the rise of new “western-friendly” though not always more democratic governments.  Hence, “color revolution” has taken on a pejorative connotation in many quarters around the world.[1]

For those in the “Truther” movement who understand the machinations of the western globalist elite—known by various names such as the Bilderbergers, Trilateralists, and Deep State—it is well-appreciated that this “cabal” led by a small group of powerful bankers seeks global control over nations and their  resources.  Truthers are also aware of the decline of the cabal’s power both at home and abroad as the burgeoning alternative media now discredits and mocks the cabal’s once-powerful media at every turn and its twin rivals Russia and China have surged into control over most of the Eurasian land mass after the cabal’s disastrous  military interventions in the Middle East.  The cabal’s arch-nemesis takes the form of Donald Trump, who is rallying Americans against the globalist agenda and is opposed to the military interventionism that the cabal requires for its global conquest to succeed.

Real Deal Reports (24 June 2020) with Dean Ryan in Austin and Mike Bara in Seattle.

Donald Trump was not expected to win the presidency in 2016—in fact, the elites put up firewalls in  several key states with their powerful urban political machines and media control and subversion by elements of his own party and even electronic surveillance.  But, his surprise victory set off a relentless series of challenges to his authority, from Russiagate to the Mueller investigation to the attempted use of the 25th amendment to the Ukraine investigation and impeachment.  All of those failed, but the COVID crisis,  the economic collapse, and the rioting following the Floyd death in Minneapolis have all combined to produce the greatest threat to Trump’s presidency.

Truthers generally believe none of the recent events were accidental, especially the COVID crisis.  Regardless of whether the coronavirus itself was engineered for the crisis (the “plandemic”), it is more certain that the restrictions on personal freedom and the devastating economic lockdowns (the “panic-demic”) were intended to subvert the economy into the elite’s hands, create radical social disruptions, and destroy Trump’s election chances.  With the publication of the leaked German government document outlining a plan of political leaders, medical experts, and the corporate media to terrorize the populace into accepting the draconian economic lockdowns, there is now indisputable evidence that the COVID lockdowns were indeed a product of conspiracy in some Western nations.[2]

The growing financial stress readily transformed itself into well-funded riots and protests led by groups such as ANTIFA and Black Lives Matter that were designed to further weaken or even destroy Trump.  Then, along with the protests and riots comes an extraordinary article in Vanity Fair about the toppling of Trump by an American “color revolution” in the form of protests and riots in key cities including the capital and the turning of key political and military leaders against law-enforcement and the President.[3]  What is significant about the article is not just its illuminating content but who wrote it—Franklin Foer.

Real Deal Reports (25 June 2020) with Dean Ryan in Austin and Mike Bara in Seattle.

Foer was one of the leading proponents of the Russiagate hoax  and a former editor of the neocon New Republic,  so, his arguments reflect the playbook of the cabal.  Sure enough, all sorts of retired generals and presidents, from Colin Powell and George W. Bush (both of “weapons of mass destruction fame”) to former Trump officials Mattis and Kelly shortly thereafter jumped on the pro-protest/anti-Trump  bandwagon.  The near-storming of the White House on May 30, 2020, was intended to be the defining moment in which Trump, like other to-be-deposed presidents of other nations, might escape from office and relinquish power.  Except it didn’t happen, not then and certainly not after the riots that damaged so much of America in the next few days but eventually fizzled out.  Why?

For one, the color revolution never occurred because the American military—trained to uphold the Constitution and defend a duly elected president–never blinked as it carried out its responsibilities to the nation. (Some police such as the Arlington, VA, force did, however, refuse to cooperate in the  defense of the nation’s capital.)  But, the larger reason was that the revolution’s color—black, the color of the Black Lives Matter and the ANTIFA flag—was the wrong color to unite various minority communities and most of the white population, aside from a small group of mainly white youth.  One of the complaints among the demonstrators  was that, in most cities, the Latino and Asian communities were largely no-shows in the protests.  But, why would this be surprising?   Asian small businesses were hit hard in these riots, as well as the Los Angeles riots of 1992, and tensions between the Asian-American and African-American communities continue to linger.

Real Deal Reports (26 June 2020) with Mike Bara in Seattle and Blake Walley in Austin.

Hispanic-American and African-American relations are also strained in some cities like Miami and Los Angeles.  Immigration is an issue that fractures partly along racial/ethnic lines, but so are attitudes towards police, which in Miami and many southwestern cities have a large Hispanic component that receives respect from the community.  Muslims and other minority religious communities also shied away from the protests, as did initially the LGBTQ community, which in some cities was actually attacked by the crowds.  Even large segments of the African-American community have stayed away from the Black Lives Matter movement[4], whose street protests are mostly non-black in composition[5].

So, despite Trump’s shaky support in all of the above communities, the color revolution not only failed but appears to have backfired.   Had they taken on more of a brown-black color or even a rainbow tinge, the protests would have had a much greater punch underneath them.  But, that’s the inherent problem with identity politics—racial, ethnic, and religious minorities not only have different but often contradictory interests.

For the cabal, it’s back to the drawing boards if they want to topple Trump—which will be infinitely more difficult than paying people to topple a bunch of statues.  There is still enormous discontent in the land, as the economic contraction deepens. But, the cabal is going to have to choose a new color for its revolution next time.

William de Berg is an American scientist and prominent conspiracy/truther fiction author by virtue of his first three political thrillers–Serpent and Savior, White Spiritual Boy, and Divided We Stand.    His latest novel–Shield Down—is a science fiction novel centered around a mass extinction event that also highlights the Apollo moon landing conspiracy.   Visit his website at  williamdeberg.com.

[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317572343_Template_Revolutions_Marketing_US_Regime_Change_in_Eastern_Europe

[2] https://faith-and-politics.com/2020/04/05/coronavirus-project-fear-exposed-by-leaked-secret-government-document

[3]  https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/how-regime-change-happens/612739

[4] https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2020/june-web-only/black-church-black-lives-matter-police-brutality.html

[5] https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/24/pew-research-only-1-in-6-protesters-are-black-46-percent-are-white

Please follow and like us:

25 thoughts on “William de Berg, Why the U.S. “Color” Revolution Failed—The Wrong Color?”

  1. I heard a famous historian say on our ABC radio, that one reason for the “stolen generation” was the whites wanted to stop aboriginal infanticide.
    (I also heard an aboriginal women say on our ABC radio, their law allows the husband to kill the wife.
    If these things are true, then living in a harsh land may have brought these harsh customs about.)
    Wikipedia……”Australia
    Literature suggests infanticide may have occurred reasonably commonly among Indigenous Australians, in all areas of Australia prior to European settlement. Infanticide may have continued to occur quite often up until the 1960s. An 1866 issue of The Australian News for Home Readers informed readers that “the crime of infanticide is so prevalent amongst the natives that it is rare to see an infant”.[94]

    Author Susanna de Vries in 2007 told a newspaper that her accounts of Aboriginal violence, including infanticide, were censored by publishers in the 1980s and 1990s. She told reporters that the censorship “stemmed from guilt over the stolen children question”.[95] Keith Windschuttle weighed in on the conversation, saying this type of censorship started in the 1970s.[95] In the same article Louis Nowra suggested that infanticide in customary Aboriginal law may have been because it was difficult to keep an abundant number of Aboriginal children alive; there were life-and-death decisions modern-day Australians no longer have to face.[95]”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide

    moderated
  2. A major review points to the unreliability of COVID tests. So, we have unreliable diagnoses, unreliable diagnostic criteria, and questionable treatments–what else do we need to shut down the world’s economy?

    moderated
  3. Although Berg seems to present this as an organic revolution….even though he knows it is/was cabal driven (much as other revolutions have been empire/cabal driven), he claims it ‘failed’. I disagree. It was never meant to succeed. I was created as a distraction for many reasons; not the least of which was to deter a true revolution of many colors as a result of this Corona hoax. They
    basically beat us to the punch and at the same testing just how much these paid disrupters could get away with. From what i see, it was a helluva lot. For the sane of us it did serve the purpose of exposing those who would have no trouble committing treason and participating in a coup.

    moderated
    1. The “color revolution” may not have been designed to force Trump to leave office immediately, but had the White House been stormed Trump would have had to vacate it. It is possible that the military would not have intervened in protecting the White House in the ensuing days had General Millay–who Trump nominated as chairman of the joint chiefs over the request of Mattis–not supported him 100%. And the failure to recruit masses of other minorities limited the rioting to a few Democratically controlled states that makes it look very bad for the BLM movement and the Democrats in general.

      moderated
      1. William, there is no doubt (or at least little doubt) the Dems did more damage than good to themselves. A large number of Americans saw through those events…….maybe not a majority, but enough to make a difference come November. They understand this was not a peaceful protest in any way.
        I really find it hard to believe the military would not have stopped an invasion of the WH. I would need more details to understand that scenario.

        moderated
        1. The military officer oath is to the Constitution, not the president. Had Trump asked Federal troops to intervene in a state without the governor’s consent, the military could very easily have refused to go along. It’s different, of course, in the nation’s capital, because it is a Federal District. Even so, Gen. Milley took charge in a strong way and faced lots of criticism from the media and retired generals. Mattis wanted Air Force Gen. Goldfein to head the joint chiefs before Milley was chosen, and Goldfein has been indirectly critical of Trump and publicly supportive of the protests. Defense Secretary Esper actually argued against the use of Federal Troops to enforce the Insurrection Act: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/06/04/revolt-generals. So, who knows how Goldfein would have responded? Certainly, the DC police were unable to control those crowds by themselves and the DC mayor did not ask for nor appreciate the deployment of Federal troops. I believe we came very close to an actual coup on May 30th.

          moderated
          1. William, I do not question your analysis, but I find it baffling that in essence, that DC, the capitol that is representative of our nation has no protection from being overthrown or at the most, little protection depending upon politics within the military?

          2. And if this is all true and a coup was averted since it’s fairly common knowledge who is behind BLM and antifa…..WHY were these entities not immediately arrested and indicted for high treason?

  4. ….this flu has been grossly hyped by political entities to control people through fear of the nearly invisible. Closing down most ALL businesses and demanding that people stay at home is total nonsense. No wonder that people are committing suicide and doing domestic violence. We live in a time of mass insanity and people agreeing with it.
    I see people people taking their mail to the garage and spraying it with bleach and letting it sit there for days before opening it. Total madness. Also washing their lettuce with Lysol.

    moderated
    1. Don: There is no flu, as in a new flu, no new virus and the PRC test was not meant to test for infectious disease. This is what I call a phantom demic. There is actually nothing there. I hope at some point Mr. Fetzer has articles on nano and 5 G technology as my gut tells me there is a mind control component to this. People are acting like stepford wives.

      moderated
      1. Look through the archives, check the Raw Deal and the Real Deal….much spoken of re 5G.
        Also, check Brian Rose and David Icke’s interview…also Dr. Rashad Buttar and Rose…Helps to look a bit below the surface. I know of no other site that covers as wide a spectrum of topics as does Fetzer in his various shows…..and books.

        moderated
        1. I have seen the Rose interview of Icke and have seen Buttar, Bigtree, Bush and others talk about the phantom demic. However, I have not seen a connection between nano and 5 G technology and mind control. If you have or anyone has specific links to this, please share. Much appreciated.

          moderated
      2. I have always been slightly offended at the term “truther,” as it somehow it prostitutes the august ideal of truth.

        Much false information circulating about the tests for “covid-19” and the “tests for coronavirus.”

        The last Raw Deal show appeared to cut off caller Guiseppe of DC when he was very cogently explaining …

        “there is no actual test for the COVID-19 / SARS 2 Coronavirus.
        A test doesn’t exist.”

        See my attempt to reach clarity and truth on this foundational subject at

        http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?101733-Coronavirus/page27

        I am still struggling to reach the strongest truth and facts regarding exactly how a medical professional reaches a firm diagnosis that a patient is “COVID-19 positive.

        When I looked up PRC just now, I got another very questionable data point…

        “The test uses a technology called PCR (polymerase chain reaction), which greatly amplifies the viral genetic material if it is present. That material is detectable when a person is actively infected.”
        https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/05/01/847368012/how-reliable-are-covid-19-tests-depends-which-one-you-mean
        The questionable data here is
        “That material is detectable when a person is actively infected.”

        I think Guiseppe has repeatedly tried to explain that there is no test for Covid-19. That means there is no test to determine if a person is “actively infected” and can spread the “disease.”

        All B S ! Bad Science

        The reason Mitchell’s skype crashed recent Raw Deal show was that it happened at the exact point when Geuseppe was speaking too much truth regarding “the virus” and our leaders’ draconian response upon society..

        moderated
        1. I thought Icke’s explanation in his interview with Brian Rose was the best I have heard. Have you listened to it and if so, what’s your opinion?

          moderated
          1. Btw, what Guiseppie is saying right now on the Raw Deal coincides precisely with Icke’s thesis.

    2. People who are curious and wish to know more science regarding “Covid 19” should do some digging. You’ll find that Covid is remarkably similar to Tuberculosis!!!!! Research by Lawrence Broxmeyer will stagger those that are truly interested in elucidating what kind of scam Covid really is. If Fauci is unaware of this information, shame on him. However,ol’ Tony knows just what this scam is really made of. Soylent Green is people and TB looks an awful lot like Covid. And, to add insult to injury, TB is best treated with hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin!!!!! But, of course, these two medicinals are banned for treatment of Covid thanks to our wonderful boys and girls who work for Fauci….

      moderated
      1. The prestigious medical journal had to retract its formerly published article against hydroxychloroquine.

        https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31324-6/fulltext

        Comment| Volume 395, ISSUE 10240, P1820, June 13, 2020

        PDF [42 KB]
        Save
        Share
        Reprints
        Request

        Retraction—Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis

        Mandeep R Mehra
        Frank Ruschitzka
        Amit N Patel

        After publication of our Lancet Article,1
        several concerns were raised with respect to the veracity of the data and analyses conducted by Surgisphere Corporation and its founder and our co-author, Sapan Desai, in our publication. We launched an independent third-party peer review of Surgisphere with the consent of Sapan Desai to evaluate the origination of the database elements, to confirm the completeness of the database, and to replicate the analyses presented in the paper.
        Our independent peer reviewers informed us that Surgisphere would not transfer the full dataset, client contracts, and the full ISO audit report to their servers for analysis as such transfer would violate client agreements and confidentiality requirements. As such, our reviewers were not able to conduct an independent and private peer review and therefore notified us of their withdrawal from the peer-review process.

        • View related content for this article
        We always aspire to perform our research in accordance with the highest ethical and professional guidelines. We can never forget the responsibility we have as researchers to scrupulously ensure that we rely on data sources that adhere to our high standards. Based on this development, we can no longer vouch for the veracity of the primary data sources. Due to this unfortunate development, the authors request that the paper be retracted.
        We all entered this collaboration to contribute in good faith and at a time of great need during the COVID-19 pandemic. We deeply apologise to you, the editors, and the journal readership for any embarrassment or inconvenience that this may have caused.
        MRM reports personal fees from Abbott, Medtronic, Janssen, Roivant, Triple Gene, Mesoblast, Baim Institute for Clinical Research, Portola, Bayer, NupulseCV, FineHeart, and Leviticus. FR has been paid for time spent as a committee member for clinical trials, advisory boards, other forms of consulting, and lectures or presentations; these payments were made directly to the University of Zurich and no personal payments were received in relation to these trials or other activities since 2018. Before 2018 FR reports grants and personal fees from SJM/Abbott, grants and personal fees from Servier, personal fees from Zoll, personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from Sanofi, grants and personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from BMS, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Fresenius, personal fees from Vifor, personal fees from Roche, grants and personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Cardiorentis, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, other from Heartware, and grants from Mars. ANP declares no competing interests.
        Reference

        1.
        Mehra MR Desai SS Ruschitzka F Patel AN
        Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis.
        Lancet. 2020; (published online May 22.)
        10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31180-6
        View in Article
        Summary
        Full Text
        Full Text PDF
        Google Scholar

        Article Info
        Publication History
        Published: June 05, 2020
        Identification

        DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31324-6
        Copyright
        © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
        ScienceDirect
        Access this article on ScienceDirect
        Linked Articles

        RETRACTED: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis
        Full-Text
        PDF
        Expression of concern: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis
        Full-Text
        PDF

        Related Hub

        COVID-19 Resource Centre
        Access the latest 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) content from across The Lancet journals as it is published.

        Published:June 05, 2020DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31324-6

        moderated

Leave a Reply