|By Mylene Doublet O’Kane, UTC+1
If the swamp has to be drained….
What students in Philosophy and researchers in my generation, grown in western Europe, knew and could not tell. These notes might help you, the ordinary American citizen and the world, out of the trap.
“He who shall be a good servant, shall not be a good master” – Plato
Interview of Zbigniew Brzezinski Le Nouvel Observateur (France), Jan 15-21, 1998
Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs [“From the Shadows”], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahideen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Question: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
Brzezinski: It isn’t quite that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Question: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn’t believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don’t regret anything today?
Brzezinski: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: “We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war”.
Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Question: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic [radicalism], having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban, or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Q:Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated: Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
Brzezinski: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn’t a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.
* There are at least two editions of this magazine; with the perhaps sole exception of the Library of Congress, the version sent to the United States is shorter than the French version, and the Brzezinski interview was not included in the shorter version. The above has been translated from the French by Bill Blum author of the indispensable, “Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II” and “Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower”.
WHO was Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski?
Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski (Polish born March 28 1928, Warsaw, died 26 May 2017, U.S) was a Polish -born American political scientist , geostrategist, and statesman who served as United States National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981. Known for his hawkish foreign policy at a time when the Democratic Party was increasingly dovish, he was a foreign policy cynically realist and considered by some to be the Democrats’ response to Republican Henry Kissinger who, however, has also openly formulated his vision for a US-led “New World Order” the last example of which was during an interview with Charlie Rose on Bloomberg, in August 2017.
Major foreign policy events during his term of office included the normalization of relations with the People’s Republic of China as a successful attempt to use it against the Soviet Union until the CIA-fomented Tiananmen Square failed ‘color revolution in 1989 , the signing of the second Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT II), the brokering of the Camp David Accords, the transition of Iran to an anti-Western Islamic state, encouraging reform in Eastern Europe and emphasizing human rights in U.S. foreign policy in order to question the legitimacy of Soviet power, the arming of the “Mujahideen” in Afghanistan to fight against the Soviet-friendly Afghan government, increase the probability of Soviet invasion and later entanglement in a Vietnam-style war and later to counter the Soviet invasion , and the signing of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties relinquishing U.S. control of the Panama Canal after 1999.
He was a professor of American foreign policy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and a member of various boards and councils. He actively participated with the Polish Pope Jean-Paul II in the so-called ‘Solidarnosc’s color revolution” in Poland as an efficient means to escalate tensions and divisions in Europe along Christian Catholic and Christian Orthodox lines. He was also an aggressive propagandist Professor of American Foreign Policy at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at Johns Hopkins University and was the protégé of both Nelson A. Rockefeller and Paul H. Nitze.
Brzezinski’s career with the U.S. Government spans several presidents:
- Advisor to John Fitzgerald Kennedy and Lyndon Baines Johnson ;
- National Security Advisor to James Earl Carter ;
- George Herbert Walker Bush’s co-chair on the National Security Advisory Task Force (1988)
- Personal advisor to Barack Obama.
- Note : 1973-76 – Co-founder with David Rockfeller of the Trilateral Commission, then its Director.
- Published Works
- The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives
- The Grand Failure: The Birth and Death of Communism in the 20th Century
- Out of Control: Global Turmoil on the Eve of the 20th Century
- Power and Principal: The Memoirs of the National Security Advisor
- Advisory Board, America Abroad Media
- Advisory Board, Partnership for a Secure America
- Chair, American Committee for Peace in Chechnya
- Honorary Chairman, AmeriCares Foundation (also used by CIA to finance Solidarosc in Poland in the 1980s)
- Former Director, Amnesty International
- Honorary Council of Advisors, American Turkish Council
- Chairman, American-Ukranian Advisory Committee (organized by Brzezinski)
- Former Director of the Atlantic Council
- Director, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) (1972 to 1977)
- Chairman, International Advisory Board for the Yale Project on The Future Culture & Civilization of China
- Vice Chair, International Crisis Group
- Director, Jamestown Foundation
- Director, Polish-American Enterprise Fund, reputed CIA front
- Director, Polish-American Freedom Foundation, reputed CIA front
- Former Director, National Endowment for Democracy (Congressionally-funded organization) later responsible with the CIA for the Coup in Ukraine (2014)
- Governor, Smith Richardson Foundation
- Trustee, Trilateral Commission; Director (1973-1976)
- Advisory Board, US- Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce
BRZEZINSKI’S GRAND CHESSBOARD STRATEGY
(Utterly important to read) Zbigniew Brzezinski
NOW, LET’S BEGIN
Al-Qaeda and the ’’Global War on Terrorism”
One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to “fabricate an enemy”. The “outside enemy” personified by Osama bin Laden is “threatening America”. Pre-emptive war directed against “Islamic terrorists” is required to defend the Homeland. Realities are turned upside down. America is under attack.
In the wake of 9/11, the creation of this “outside enemy” has served to obfuscate the real economic and strategic objectives behind the war in the Middle East and Central Asia. Waged on the grounds of self-defense, the pre-emptive war is upheld as a “just war” with a humanitarian mandate. As anti-war sentiment grows and the political legitimacy the Bush Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this illusive “outside enemy” must be dispelled.
Counter-terrorism and war propaganda are intertwined. The propaganda apparatus feeds disinformation into the news chain. The terror warnings must appear to be “genuine”. The objective is to present the terror groups as “enemies of America.” Ironically, A1 Qaeda — the “outside enemy of America” as well as the alleged architect of the 9/11 attacks— is a creation of the CIA. From the outset of the Soviet- Afghan war in the early 1980s, the US intelligence apparatus has supported the formation of the “Islamic brigades”. Propaganda purports to erase the history of A1 Qaeda, drown the truth and “kill the evidence” on how this “outside enemy” was fabricated and transformed into “Enemy Number One”.
The US intelligence apparatus has created its own terrorist organizations. And at the same time, it creates its own terrorist warnings concerning the terrorist organizations which it has itself created. Meanwhile, a cohesive multibillion dollar counterterrorism program “to go after” these terrorist organizations has been put in place.
Portrayed in stylized fashion by the Western media, Osama bin Laden, supported by his various henchmen, constitutes America’s post-Cold war bogeyman, who “threatens Western democracy”. The alleged threat of “Islamic terrorists”, permeates the entire US national security doctrine. Its purpose is to justify wars of aggression in the Middle East, while establishing within America, the contours of the Homeland Security State.
What are the historical origins of A1 Qaeda? Who is Osama bin Laden? The alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorists attacks, Saudi-born Osama bin Laden, was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war, “ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders”.
(Hugh Davies, “‘Informers’ point the finger at bin Laden; Washington on alert for suicide bombers.” The Daily Telegraph, London, 24 August 1998).
In 1979 the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA was launched in Afghanistan:
“With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI, who wanted to turn the Afghan Jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan’s fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually, more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad.”
(Ahmed Rashid, “The Taliban: Exporting Extremism”, Foreign Affairs, November-December 1999).
This project of the US intelligence apparatus was conducted with the active support of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), which was entrusted in channeling covert military aid to the Islamic brigades and financing, in liaison with the CIA, the madrassahs and Mujahideen training camps.
U.S. government support to the Mujahideen was presented to world public opinion as a “necessary response” to the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in support of the pro- Communist government of Babrak Kamal. The CIA’s military-intelligence operation in Afghanistan, which consisted in creating the “Islamic brigades”, was launched prior rather than in response to the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan. In fact, Washington’s intent was to deliberately trigger a civil war, which has lasted for more than 25 years.
The CIA’s role in laying the foundations of A1 Qaeda is confirmed in an 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, who at the time was National Security Adviser to President Jimmy Carter, as published above. Consistent with Brzezinski’s account, a “Militant Islamic Network” was created by the CIA. The “Islamic Jihad” (or holy war against the Soviets) became an integral part of the CIA’s intelligence ploy. It was supported by the United States and Saudi Arabia, with a significant part of the funding generated from the Golden Crescent drug trade:
“In March 1985, President Reagan signed National Security Decision Directive 166 [which] authorize[d] stepped-up covert military aid to the Mujahideen, and it made clear that the secret Afghan war had a new goal: to defeat Soviet troops in Afghanistan through covert action and encourage a Soviet withdrawal. The new covert U.S. assistance began with a dramatic increase in arms supplies – a steady rise to 65,000 tons annually by 1987 as well as a “ceaseless stream” of CIA and Pentagon specialists who travelled to the secret headquarters of Pakistan’s ISI on the main road near Rawalpindi, Pakistan. There, the CIA specialists met with Pakistani intelligence officers to help plan operations for the Afghan rebels. “(Steve Coll, The Washington Post, July 19, 1992.)
The Central Intelligence Agency using Pakistan’s ISI as a go-between played a key role in training the Mujahideen. In turn, the CIA-sponsored guerrilla training was integrated with the teachings of Islam. The madrasahs (koranic schools) were set up by Wahabi fundamentalists financed out of Saudi Arabia: “It was the government of the United States who supported Pakistani dictator General Zia-ul Haq in creating thousands of religious schools, from which the germs of the Taliban emerged. “(Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA),
“RAWA Statement on the Terrorist Attacks in the U.S.”, Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), please refer to http://globalresearch.ca/articles/RAW109A.html , 16 September 2001)
Predominant themes were that Islam was a complete socio-political ideology, that holy Islam was being violated by the atheistic Soviet troops, and that the Islamic people of Afghanistan should reassert their independence by overthrowing the leftist Afghan regime propped up by Moscow. (Dilip Hiro, Fallout from the Afghan Jihad, Inter Press Services, 21 November 1995.)
The CIA sponsored Narcotics Trade
The history of the drug trade in Central Asia is intimately related to the CIA’s covert operations. Prior to the Soviet- Afghan war, opium production in Afghanistan and Pakistan was directed to small regional markets. There was no local production of heroin.
(Alfred McCoy, Drug Fallout: the CIA’s Forty Year Complicity in the Narcotics Trade.The Progressive, 1 August 1997).
Researcher Alfred McCoy’s study confirms that within two years of the onslaught of the CIA operation in Afghanistan, “the Pakistan-Afghanistan borderlands became the world’s top heroin producer, supplying 60 per cent of U.S. demand.” (Ibid)
“CIA assets again controlled this heroin trade. As the Mujahideen guerrillas seized territory inside Afghanistan, they ordered peasants to plant opium as a revolutionary tax.
Across the border in Pakistan, Afghan leaders and local syndicates under the protection of Pakistan Intelligence operated hundreds of heroin laboratories. During this decade of wide-open drug-dealing, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency in Islamabad failed to instigate major seizures or arrests. . (Ibid)
Afghanistan is a strategic hub in Central Asia, bordering on China’s Western frontier and on the former Soviet Union. While it constitutes a land bridge for the oil and gas pipeline corridors linking the Caspian sea basin to the Arabian sea, it is also strategic for its opium production, which today, according to UN sources, supplies more than 90 % of the World’s heroin market, representing multi-billion dollar revenues for business syndicates, financial institutions, intelligence agencies and organized crime. (See Michel Chossudovsky, America’s “War on Terrorism, Global Research, 2005, Chapter XVI)
Protected by the CIA, a new surge in opium production unfolded in the post-Cold War era. Since the October 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan, opium production has increased 33 fold since the US led invasion. The annual proceeds of the Golden Crescent drug trade are estimated between 120 and 194 billion dollars (2006), representing more than one third of the worldwide annual turnover of the narcotics trade. (Michel Chossudovsky, Heroin is good for Your Health, Occupation Forces Support Afghan Drug Trade, Global
Research, April 2007. see also Douglas Keh, Drug Money in a Changing World, Technical document No. 4, 1998),
From the Soviet- Afghan War to the “War on Terrorism”
Despite the demise of the Soviet Union, Pakistan’s extensive military-intelligence apparatus (the ISI) was not dismantled. In the wake of the Cold War, the CIA continued to support the Islamic brigades out of Pakistan. New undercover initiatives were set in motion in the Middle East, Central Asia, the Balkans and south East Asia. In the immediate wke of the Cold War, Pakistan’s ISI “served as a catalyst for the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the emergence of six new Muslim republics in Central Asia”. (International Press Services, 22 August 1995).
Meanwhile, Islamic missionaries of the Wahabi sect from Saudi Arabia had established themselves in the Muslim republics, as well as within the Russian federation, encroaching upon the institutions of the secular State. Despite its anti-American ideology, Islamic fundamentalism was largely serving Washington’s strategic interests in the former Soviet Union, the Balkans and the Middle East.
Following the withdrawal of Soviet troops in 1989, the civil war in Afghanistan continued unabated. The Taliban were being supported by the Pakistani Deobandis and their political party, the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Islam (JUI). In 1993, the JUI entered Pakistan’s government coalition of Prime Minister Benazzir Bhutto. Ties between the JUI, the Army and the ISI were established. In 1996, with the downfall of the Hezb-I- Islami Hektmatyar government in Kabul, the Taliban not only instated a hardline Islamic government, they also “handed control of training camps in Afghanistan over to JUI
factions.”. (Ahmed Rashid, “The Taliban: Exporting Extremism”, Foreign Affairs,
November – December, 1999, p. 22.) The JUI, with the support of the Saudi Wahabi movement, played a key role in recruiting volunteers to fight in the Balkans and the former Soviet Union. (Ibid)
Jane Defence Weekly confirms, that “half of Taliban manpower and equipment originate[d] in Pakistan under the 1ST’. In fact, it would appear that following the Soviet withdrawal, both sides in the Afghan civil war continued to receive US covert support through Pakistan’s 1ST (Tim McGirk, “Kabul Leams to Live with its Bearded Conquerors”, The Independent, London, 6 November 1996.)
Backed by Pakistan’s military intelligence, which in turn was controlled by the CIA, the Taliban Islamic State largely served US geopolitical interests. No doubt this explains why Washington had closed its eyes on the reign of terror imposed by the Taliban in 1996, including the blatant derogation of women’s rights, the closing down of schools for girls, the dismissal of women employees from government offices and the enforcement of “the Sharia laws of punishment”. (K. Subrahmanyam, “Pakistan is Pursuing Asian Goals”, India Abroad, 3 November 1995.)
The Golden Crescent drug trade was also being used to finance and equip the Bosnian Muslim Army (starting in the early 1990s) and the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). In fact, at the time of the September 1 1 attacks, CIA-sponsored Mujahideen mercenaries were fighting within the ranks of KLA-NLA terrorists in their assaults into Macedonia.
The War in Chechnya
In Chechnya, the renegade autonomous region of the Russian Federation, the main rebel leaders, Shamil Basayev and A1 Khattab, were trained and indoctrinated in CIA- sponsored camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan. According to Yossef Bodansky, director of the U.S. Congress’ Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, the war in Chechnya had been planned during a secret summit of HizbAllah International held in 1996 in Mogadishu, Somalia. (Levon Sevunts, “Who’s Calling The Shots? Chechen conflict finds Islamic roots in Afghanistan and Pakistan”, The Gazette, Montreal, 26 October 1999.)
The summit was attended by none other than Osama bin Laden, as well as high-ranking Iranian and Pakistani intelligence officers. It’s obvious that the involvement of Pakistan’s ISI in Chechnya “goes far beyond supplying the Chechens with weapons and expertise: The ISI and its radical Islamic proxies are actually calling the shots in this war. “(Ibid)
Russia’s main pipeline route transits through Chechnya and Dagestan. Despite Washington’s condemnation of “Islamic terrorism”, the indirect beneficiaries of the wars in Chechnya are the Anglozionist oil conglomerates which are vying for complete control over oil resources and pipeline corridors out of the Caspian Sea basin.
The two main Chechen rebel armies (which at the time were led by the (late) Commander Shamil Basayev and Emir Khattab), estimated at 35,000 strong, were supported by Pakistan’s ISI, which also played a key role in organizing and training the rebel army:
“[In 1994] the Pakistani Inter Services Intelligence arranged for Basayev and his trusted lieutenants to undergo intensive Islamic indoctrination and training in guerrilla warfare in the Khost province of Afghanistan at Amir Muawia camp, set up in the early 1980s by the CIA and ISI and run by famous Afghani warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. In July 1994, upon graduating from Amir Muawia, Basayev was transferred to Markaz-i-Dawar camp in Pakistan to undergo training in advanced guerrilla tactics. In Pakistan, Basayev met the highest ranking Pakistani military and intelligence officers: Minister of Defence General Aftab Shahban Mirani, Minister of Interior General Naserullah Babar, and the head of the ISI branch in charge of supporting Islamic causes, General Javed Ashraf (all now retired. High-level connections soon proved very useful to Basayev.” (Ibid)
Following his training and indoctrination stint, Basayev was assigned to lead the assault against Russian federal troops in the first Chechen war in 1995. His organization had also developed extensivelinks to criminal syndicates in Moscow as well as ties to Albanian organized crime and the KLA. In 1997-1998, according to Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) “Chechen warlords started buying up real estate in Kosovo through several real estate firms registered as a cover in Yugoslavia.” (Vitaly Romanov and Viktor Yadukha, “Chechen Front Moves To Kosovo”, Segodnia, Moscow, 23 Feb 2000)
Dismantling Secular Institutions in the former Soviet Union
The enforcement of Islamic law in the largely secular Muslim societies of the former Soviet Union has served America’s strategic interests in the region. Previously, a strong secular tradition based on a rejection of Islamic law prevailed throughout the Central Asian republics and the Caucasus, including Chechnya and Dagestan (which are part of the Russian Federation).
The 1994-1996 Chechen war, instigated by the main rebel movements against Moscow, has served to undermine secular state institutions. A parallel system of local government, controlled by the Islamic militia, was implanted in many localities in Chechnya. In some of the small towns and villages, Islamic Sharia courts were established under a reign of political terror.
Financial aid from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States to the rebel armies was conditional upon the installation of the Sharia courts, despite strong opposition of the civilian population. The Principal Judge and Ameer of the Sharia courts in Chechnya was Sheikh Abu Umar, who “came to Chechnya in 1995 and joined the ranks of the Mujahideen there under the leadership of Ibn-ul-Khattab. . He set about teaching Islam with the correct Aqeedah to the Chechen Mujahideen, many of whom held incorrect and distorted beliefs about Islam.”
(Global Muslim News, http://www.islam.org.au/articles/21/news.htm, December 1997).
Meanwhile, state institutions of the Russian Federation in Chechnya were crumbling under the brunt of the IMF-sponsored austerity measures imposed under the Presidency of Boris Yeltsin. In contrast, the Sharia courts, financed and equipped out of Saudi Arabia, were gradually displacing existing State institutions of the Russian Federation and the Chechnya autonomous region.
The Wahabi movement from Saudi Arabia was not only attempting to overrun civilian State institutions in Dagestan and Chechnya, it was also seeking to displace the traditional Sufi Muslim leaders. In fact, the resistance to the Islamic rebels in Dagestan was based on the alliance of the (secular) local governments with the Sufi sheiks :
“These [Wahabi] groups consist of a very tiny but well-financed and well-armed minority. They propose with these attacks the creation of terror in the hearts of the masses. By creating anarchy and lawlessness, these groups can enforce their own harsh, intolerant brand of Islam. Such groups do not represent the common view of Islam, held by the vast majority of Muslims and Islamic scholars, for whom Islam exemplifies the paragon of civilization and perfected morality. They represent what is nothing less than a movement to anarchy under an Islamic label. Their intention is not so much to create an Islamic state, but to create a state of confusion in which they are able to thrive.
Mateen Siddiqui, “Differentiating Islam from Militant ’Islamists'” San Francisco Chronicle, 2 1 September 1999.
Promoting Secessionist Movements in India
In parallel with its covert operations in the Balkans and the former Soviet Union, Pakistan’s ISI has provided, since the 1980s, support to several secessionist Islamic insurgencies in India’s Kashmir.
Although officially condemned by Washington, these covert ISI operations were undertaken with the tacit approval of the U.S. government. Coinciding with the 1989 Geneva Peace Agreement and the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, the ISI was instrumental in the creation of the militant Jammu and Kashmir Hizbul Mujahideen
(JKHM). (See K. Subrahmanyam, “Pakistan is Pursuing Asian Goals”, India Abroad, 3 November 1995).
In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the December 2001 terrorist attacks on the Indian Parliament – which contributed to pushing India and Pakistan to the brink of war – were conducted by two Pakistan-based rebel groups, Lashkar-e-Taiba, (Army of the Pure) and Jaish-e-Muhammad (Anny of Mohammed), both of which are covertly supported by Pakistan’s ISI.
(Council on Foreign Relations, “Terrorism: Questions and Answers, Harakat ul-Mujahideen, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Muhammad”,
http://www.terrorismanswers.com/groups/harakat2.html, Washington 2002.
Note:This report is sadly no longer available on the CFR website.) If someone can restore the link or web cache, contact me (Mylene Doublet O’Kane. Thank you)
The timely attack on the Indian Parliament, followed by the ethnic riots in Gujarat in early 2002, were the culmination of a process initiated in the 1980s, financed by drug money and abetted by Pakistan’s military intelligence.
Needless to say, these ISI-supported terrorist attacks serve the geopolitical interests of the U.S. The powerful Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), which plays a behind-the-scenes role in the formulation of U.S. foreign policy, confirms that the Lashkar and Jaish rebel groups are supported by the ISI:
Through its Inter-Service Intelligence Agency (ISI), Pakistan has provided funding, arms, training facilities, and aid in crossing borders to Lashkar and Jaish. This assistance – an attempt to replicate in Kashmir the international Islamist brigade’s “holy war” against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan – helped introduce radical Islam into the long-standing conflict over the fate of Kashmir.
Have these groups received funding from sources other than the Pakistani government?
Yes. Members of the Pakistani and Kashmiri communities in England send millions of dollars a year, and Wahabi sympathizers in the Persian Gulf also provide support.
Do Islamist terrorists in Kashmir have ties to Al-Qaeda?
Yes. In 1998, the leader of Harakat, Farooq Kashmiri Khalil, signed Osama bin Laden’s declaration calling for attacks on Americans, including civilians, and their allies. Bin Laden is also suspected of funding Jaish, according to U.S. and Indian officials. And Maulana Massoud Azhar, who founded Jaish, travelled to Afghanistan several times to meet bin Laden.
Where were these Islamist militants trained?
Many were given ideological training in the same madrassas (Kuranic schools), or Muslim seminaries that taught the Taliban and foreign fighters in Afghanistan. They received military training at camps in Afghanistan or in villages in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir. Extremist groups opened several new madrassas in Azad Kashmir.
(Council on Foreign Relations, “Terrorism: Questions and Answers, Harakat ul-
Mujahideen, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Muhammad”,
http://www.terrorismanswers.com/groups/harakat2.html, Washington 2002.
Note : This text was removed from the CFR website in 2006). If someone can restore the link or web cache, contact me (Mylene Doublet O’Kane. Thank you)
What the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) fails to acknowledge are the links between the ISI and the CIA and the fact that the “international Islamic brigades” were a creation of the CIA.
U.S.-Sponsored Insurgencies in China
Also of significance in understanding America’s “War on Terrorism” is the existence of ISI-supported Islamic insurgencies on China’s Western border with Afghanistan and Pakistan. In fact, several of the Islamic movements in the Muslim republics of the former Soviet Union are integrated with the Turkestan and Uighur movements in China’s Xinjiang-Uighur autonomous region.
These separatist groups – which include the East Turkestan Terrorist Force, the Islamic Reformist Party, the East Turkestan National Unity Alliance, the Uighur Liberation Organization and the Central Asian Uighur Jihad Party – have all received support and training from Osama bin Laden’s A1 Qaeda. (According to official Chinese sources quoted in UPI, 20 November 2001.). The declared objective of these Chinese-based Islamic insurgencies is the “establishment of an Islamic caliphate in the region”. (Defence and Security, May 30, 2001).
The caliphate would integrate Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan (West Turkestan) and the Uighur autonomous region of China (East Turkestan) into a single political entity. The “caliphate project” encroaches upon Chinese territorial sovereignty. Supported by various Saudi Arabia-led funded takfirist “foundations” from the Gulf States, secessionism on China’s Western frontier is, once again, consistent with U.S. strategic interests in Central Asia. Meanwhile, a powerful U.S. -based lobby is channeling support to separatist forces in Tibet.
By tacitly promoting the secession of the Xinjiang-Uighur region (using Pakistan’s ISI as a “go-between”),Washington is attempting to trigger a broader process of political destabilization and fracturing of the People’s Republic of China. In addition to these various covert operations, the U.S. has established military bases in Afghanistan and in several of the former Soviet republics, directly on China’s Western border. The militarization of the South China Sea and of the Taiwan Straits is also an integral part of this strategy.
Throughout the 1990s, the Pakistan Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) was used by the CIA as a go-between — to channel weapons and Mujahideen mercenaries to the Bosnian Muslim Army in the civil war in Yugoslavia. According to a report of the London based International Media Corporation:
“Reliable sources report that the United States is now  actively participating in the arming and training of the Muslim forces of Bosnia-Herzegovina in direct contravention of the United Nations accords. US agencies have been providing weapons made in … China (PRC), North Korea (DPRK) and Iran. The sources indicated that … Iran, with the knowledge and agreement of the US Government, supplied the Bosnian forces with a large number of multiple rocket launchers and a large quantity of ammunition. These included 107 mm and 122 mm rockets from the PRC, and VBR-230 multiple rocket launchers “made in Iran”.
It was [also] reported that 400 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (Pasdaran) arrived in Bosnia with a large supply of arms and ammunition. It was alleged that the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had full knowledge of the operation and that the CIA believed that some of the 400 had been detached for future terrorist operations in Western Europe.
The US Administration has not restricted its involvement to the clandestine contravention of the UN arms embargo on the region. It [also] committed three high-ranking delegations over the past two years [prior to 1994] in failed attempts to bring the Yugoslav Government into line with US policy. Yugoslavia is the only state in the region to have failed to acquiesce to US pressure.”
(International Media Corporation, Defence and Strategy Policy, U.S. Commits Forces, Weapons to Bosnia, London, 31 October 1994)
“From the Horse’s Mouth”
Bosnia : Thousands of Saudi Arabia-funded Jihadists used
Ironically, the US Administration’s undercover military-intelligence operations in Bosnia, which consisted in promoting the formation of “Islamic brigades”, have been fully documented by the Republican Party. A lengthy Congressional report by the Senate Republican Party Committee (RPC) published in 1997, largely confirms the International Media Corporation report quoted above. The RPC Congressional report accuses the Clinton administration of having “helped turn Bosnia into a militant Islamic base” leading to the recruitment through the so-called “Militant Islamic Network,” of thousands of Mujahideen from the Muslim world:
“Perhaps most threatening to the SFOR mission – and more importantly, to the safety of the American personnel serving in Bosnia – is the unwillingness of the Clinton Administration to come clean with the Congress and with the American people about its complicity in the delivery of weapons from Iran to the Muslim government in Sarajevo. That policy, personally approved by Bill Clinton in April 1994 at the urging of CIA Director-designate (and then-NSC chief) Anthony Lake and the U.S. ambassador to Croatia Peter Galbraith, has, according to the Los Angeles Times (citing classified intelligence community sources), “played a central role in the dramatic increase in Iranian influence in Bosnia.
(…) Along with the weapons, Iranian Revolutionary Guards and VEVAK intelligence operatives entered Bosnia in large numbers, along with thousands of mujahedin (“holy warriors”) from across the Muslim world. Also engaged in the effort were several other Muslim countries (including Brunei, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Turkey) and a number of radical Muslim organizations. For example, the role of one Sudan-based “humanitarian organization,” called the Third World Relief Agency, has been well documented. The Clinton Administration’s “hands-on” involvement with the Islamic network’s arms pipeline included inspections of missiles from Iran by U.S. government officials… the Third World Relief Agency (TWRA), a Sudan-based, phoney humanitarian organization … has been a major link in the arms pipeline to Bosnia. … TWRA is believed to be connected with such fixtures of the Islamic terror network as Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman (the convicted mastermind behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing) and Osama Bin Laden, a wealthy Saudi emigre believed to bankroll numerous militant groups”.
[Washington Post, 9/22/96] (Congressional Press Release, Republican Party Committee
(RPC), U.S. Congress, Clinton- Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help Turn Bosnia into
Militant Islamic Base, Washington DC, 16 January 1997.
The original document is on the website of the U.S. Senate Republican Party Committee (Senator Larry Craig), at http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/releases/1997/iran.htm; see also Washington Post, 22 September 1999, Emphasis added)
Complicity of the Clinton Administration
In other words, the Republican Party Committee report confirms unequivocally the complicity and utilization of the Clinton Administration with/of several Islamic fundamentalist organizations including Al Qaeda. The Republicans wanted at the time to undermine the Clinton Administration. However, at a time when the entire country had its eyes riveted on the Monica Lewinsky scandal, the Republicans no doubt chose not to trigger an untimely “Iran-Bosnia-Gate” affair, which might have unduly diverted public attention away from the Lewinsky scandal. The Republicans wanted to impeach Bill Clinton “for having lied to the American People” regarding his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. On the more substantive “foreign policy lies” regarding drug running and covert operations in the Balkans, Democrats and Republicans agreed in unison, no doubt pressured by the Pentagon and the CIA not to “spill the beans”.
From Bosnia to Kosovo
The “Bosnian pattern” described in the 1997 Congressional RPC report was replicated in Kosovo. With the complicity of NATO and the US State Department, Mujahideen mercenaries from the Middle East and Central Asia were recruited to fight in the ranks of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) in 1998-99, largely supporting NATO’s war effort.
Confirmed by British military sources, the task of arming and training of the KLA had been entrusted in 1998 to the US Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) and Britain’s Secret Intelligence Services MI6, together with “former and serving members of 22 SAS [Britain’s 22nd Special Air Services Regiment], as well as three British and American private security companies”. (The Scotsman, Edinburgh, 29 August 1999).
“The US DIA approached MI6 to arrange a training programme for the KLA”, said a senior British military source. MI6 then sub-contracted the operation to two British security companies, who in turn approached a number of former members of the (22 SAS) regiment. Lists were then drawn up of weapons and equipment needed by the KLA.’ While these covert operations were continuing, serving members of 22 SAS Regiment, mostly from the unit’s D Squadron, were first deployed in Kosovo before the beginning of the bombing campaign in March. (Truth in Media, “Kosovo in Crisis”, Phoenix, Arizona, http://www.truthinmedia.org/, 2 April 1999).
While British SAS Special Forces in bases in Northern Albania were training the KLA, military instructors from Turkey and Afghanistan financed by the “Islamic jihad” were collaborating in training the KLA in guerilla and diversion tactics. (The Sunday Times, London, 29 November 1998).
“Bin Laden had visited Albania himself. He was one of several fundamentalist groups that had sent units to fight in Kosovo. Bin Laden is believed to have established an operation in Albania in 1994 .Albanian sources say Sali Berisha, who was then president, had links with some groups that later proved to be extreme fundamentalists.”
(Ibid) Congressional Testimonies on KLA-Al Qaeda links
In the mid-1990s, the CIA and Germany’s Secret Service, the BND, joined hands in providing covert support to the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). In turn, the latter was receiving support from A1 Qaeda. According to Frank Ciluffo of the Globalized Organized Crime Program, in a December 2000 testimony to the House of Representatives Judicial Committee:
“What was largely hidden from public view was the fact that the KLA raise part of their funds from the sale of narcotics. Albania and Kosovo lie at the heart of the “Balkan Route” that links the “Golden Crescent” of Afghanistan and Pakistan to the drug markets of Europe. This route is worth an estimated $400 billion a year and handles 80 percent of heroin destined for Europe.”
(U.S. Congress, Testimony of Frank J. Cilluffo, Deputy Director of the Global Organized Crime Program, to the House Judiciary Committee, Washington DC, 13 December 2000).
According to Ralf Mutschke of Interpol’s Criminal Intelligence division also in a testimony to the House Judicial Committee:
“The U.S. State Department listed the KLA as a terrorist organization, indicating that it was financing its operations with money from the international heroin trade and loans from Islamic countries and individuals, among them allegedly Usama bin Laden” .
Another link to bin Laden is the fact that the brother of a leader in an Egyptian Jihad organization and also a military commander of Usama bin Laden was leading an elite KLA unit during the Kosovo conflict.”
(U.S. Congress, Testimony of Ralf Mutschke of Interpol’s Criminal Intelligence Division, to the House Judicial Committee, Washington DC, 13 December 2000.)
Madeleine Albright Covets the KLA
These KLA links to international terrorism and organized crime documented by the US Congress were totally ignored by the Clinton Administration. In fact, in the months preceding the bombing of Yugoslavia, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was busy building a “political legitimacy” for the KLA. The paramilitary army had —from one day to the next— been elevated to the status of a bona fide “democratic” force in Kosovo. In turn, Madeleine Albright has forced the pace of international diplomacy: the KLA had been spearheaded into playing a central role in the failed “peace negotiations” at Rambouillet- France- in early 1999.
The Senate and the House tacitly endorse State Terrorism
While the various Congressional reports confirmed that the US government had been working hand in glove with Osama bin Laden’s A1 Qaeda, this did not prevent the Clinton and later the Bush Administration from arming and equipping the KLA. The Congressional documents also confirm that members of the Senate and the House knew the relationship of the Administration to international terrorism. To quote the statement of Rep. John Kasich of the House Armed Services Committee:
“We connected ourselves [in 1998-99] with the KLA, which was the staging point for bin Laden.”
(U.S. Congress, Transcripts of the House Armed Services Committee, Washington, DC, 5 October 1999)
In the wake of the tragic events of September 11, Republicans and Democrats in unison have given their full support to the President to “wage war on Osama”. In 1999, Senator Jo Lieberman had stated authoritatively that “Fighting for the KLA is fighting for human rights and American values.” In the hours following the October 7 missile attacks on Afghanistan, the same Jo Lieberman called for punitive air strikes against Iraq:
“We’re in a war against terrorism… We can’t stop with bin Laden and the Taliban.” Yet Senator Jo Lieberman, as member of the Armed Services Committee of the Senate had access to all the Congressional documents pertaining to “KLA-Osama” links. In making this statement, he was fully aware that agencies of the US government as well as NATO were supporting international terrorism.
– Tremendous thanks to Julian Assange – WikiLeaks- Mylene Doublet-O’Kane
“A passage to Afghanistan”
(By Mylene Doublet O’Kane)
Speech by David Rockefeller at the National Press Club. The National Press Club seemed to fully understand and agree with what David was referring to:
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world ». We had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.” – David Rockefeller
Which of our elected officials, who have sworn an oath to uphold our Constitution, are involved in ‘supranational’ efforts to “march” us to a NWO? How many 1st responders died responding to 9/11, how many continue to suffer illnesses related to 9/11?
What happened on 911? WHY?
Will something like this happen again?
1/”Federal Reserve had to cover-up the clearance of $240 Billion in covert securities”, this was before 9/11
2/Was Larry Silverstein ever asked what he knew and when did he know it? Am I wrong? I don’t remember him called to testify before the 9/11 Commission or Congress.
3/Who ‘happened’ to be in the ‘death corridor’ and what were they investigatingat the time?
4/Must watch, you will have no doubt that this needs to be re-opened:9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out, Full-length (broken link…naturally)
5/ “The answers to the questions surrounding the cause of the WTC attack will be found in events during the presidency of George H.W. Bush and earlier. Insight into the activities of that period is cloaked by the Executive Order of George H.W. Bush’s son, President George W. Bush, who on November 1, 2001 issued Executive Order 13233.”
“In 1992, George H.W. Bush served on the Advisory Board of Barrick Gold. The Barrick operation would create billions of dollars of paper gold by creating gold derivatives. A major distribution channel for the sale of Barrick’s gold futures would be Enron.”
“The records on this investigation were kept in the FBI office on the 23rd floor of the North Tower which was destroyed by bomb blasts shortly before the Tower collapsed.”
The Wall Street Journal reported:
“There is every reason to believe activities in the Bank of New York in the aftermath of September 11th are worthy of suspicion. At one point during the week after September 11, the Bank of New York publicly reported to be overdue on $100 billion in payments. It suggests that certain key unknown figures in the Federal Reserve may have been in collusion.”
Was September 11 a Cover-up of a Financial Fraud?
The following is an attempt to present in a compact form the claims made by Dick Eastman, Tom Flocco, V.K. Durham, Karl Schwarz and put together in an the article by E.P. Heidner dated 28th June 2008 to the effect that the September 11th attacks were intended to cover-up the clearing of the 1991 issuance of $240 billion in covert securities to fund an economic war against the Soviet Union during which “unknown” western investors bought up much of the Soviet industry ; a crime presented by official sources as a “terrorist attack” and used as an excuse to attack Iraq.
September 9/11; initially the official designation of “terrorist attacks” made it difficult to discern a pattern. However if the destruction of the World Trade Centre, a segment of the Pentagon, four commercial aircraft and the loss of 2,993 lives is not considered as a “terrorist attack” but rather as a crime with specific objectives, there is a compelling logic to the pattern of destruction, not only of the buildings but of specific offices within each building.
If the attack on the Office of Naval Intelligence in the Pentagon was not random it is reasonable to assume that the planes that hit the World Trade Centre, and the bombs reported by various witnesses to have been set off inside the buildings 1, 6, 7, the basement of the Towers, the vault in the basement of the World Trade Centre were also deliberately targeted. Why?
What was the link between these targets?
The destruction of the contents of the basement of the World Trade Centre – less than a billion in gold, but hundreds of billions of dollars of government securities?
In addition why were specific brokers from the major government security brokerages in the Twin Towers eliminated? To create chaos in the government securities market?
To create a situation wherein $240 billion dollars of covert securities could be electronically cleared without anyone asking questions; which happened when the Federal Reserve declared an emergency and invoked its emergency powers that afternoon?
There were three major securities brokers in the World Trade Center:
- Cantor Fitzgerald,
- and Garbon Inter Capital.
On the morning of September 11, Flight 11 hit the North Tower at 8:46 right below the floors on which Cantor Fitzgerald was situated. Cantor Fitzgerald as the largest securities dealer in the US was probably the primary target. Shortly thereafter a massive explosion went off under the FBI offices in the North Tower on the 23rd floor, Garbon Inter Capital on the 25th floor, and in the basement of Tower 1. The explosion caused the 22nd through 25th floors above to collapse into an inferno. Fires were reported on the 22nd floor at 8:47.
Shortly, thereafter, at 9:03, Flight 175 hit the South Tower right below the floors on which Euro Brokers was situated. In all three cases, the explosive, fiery destruction consumed the offices in the several floors above.
At 9:37 Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, targeting one of the few offices that had been moved in the newly remodeled section of the Pentagon:
- The Office of Naval Intelligence, which had been investigating the financial transactions linked to the securities being managed by those security dealers in the World Trade Center that were targeted.
- 41% of the fatalities in the Twin Towers came from two companies that managed U.S. government securities: Cantor Fitzgerald and Eurobrokers. 31% of the 125 fatalities in the Pentagon were from the Naval Command Center that housed the Office of Naval Intelligence. 39 of 40 Office of Naval Intelligence employees died.
- In the vaults beneath the World Trade Center Towers, any certificates for bonds were destroyed.
- Building 7 was evacuated somewhere between 9:00 and 9:30.
- Fires and explosions spontaneously began at multiple locations inside the building prior to the collapse of either Tower.
This observation contradicts the official explanation that the fire started when objects from the collapsing towers caused the fires to ignite. The Building ultimately was destroyed in what many unofficial observers now believe was a controlled demolition. Building Seven housed several agencies critical to investigation of financial crimes.
In the midst of all this, Building 6 was destroyed by explosions from within. Building 6 was home to the U.S. Customs agency and the El Dorado Task force, which was responsible for coordinating all major money-laundering investigations in the U.S. In the immediate aftermath of September 11, these groups would be redirected to investigate terrorist financing.
The Office of Naval Intelligence in the Pentagon, which sustained a direct hit from an airliner that day, was without a doubt, a target pinpointed for destruction.
The attacking aircraft went through intricate maneuvers in order to hit the west side of the Pentagon. The flight path approach shows that the attacking aircraft passed almost directly over the White House, bypassing what should be considered a primary target for a “terrorist attack” instead of a supposedly empty section of the Pentagon.
The planes that hit the South Tower also maneuvered in the last moments to hit their exact target.
On the same day, (September 11) the Securities and Exchange Commission declared a national emergency and for the first time in U.S. history invoked its emergency powers under Securities Exchange Act Section 12(k) and eased regulatory restrictions for clearing and settling security trades for the next 15 days.
These changes would allow an estimated $240 billion in covert government securities to be cleared upon maturity (September 12th) without the standard regulatory controls around identification of ownership.
While most media reports defer to the U.S. government contention that Osama Bin Laden was behind these attacks, foreign media provided reports suggesting that the federal power behind Al Qaeda was unknown.
As shall be seen, the financial power behind the attack is the same power that created these securities, and the same power as that which founded Al Qaeda.
In order to understand why the ongoing Federal investigations into the crimes funded by those securities needed to be ended or disrupted by destroying evidence in Buildings 6, 7 and 1, it is necessary to understand how the $240 billion in covert, and possibly illegal government funding, could have been created in September 9/11 and also to know the background of 50 years of history of key financial organizations in the United States, where U.S. Intelligence became a key source of their off-balance sheet accounts.
The covert securities used to accomplish the original national security objective had ended up in the vaults of the brokers in the World Trade Centre, were destroyed on September 11, 2001, the day before they came due for settlement and clearing.
Either a key group of senior National Security officials, who had participated in the victory of the economic cold war in 1991, considered the deaths and destruction as collateral” damage to hide the existence of the covert activities or the destruction constituted a cover-up of continued lawlessness by a fraternity or brotherhood of businessmen and criminals that has remained in the shadows ever since.
The Origins of the World Trade Centre Attack
Most historians track the history of September 11th to 1998 when Osama Bin Laden declared a Fatwa or Jihad against the U.S., and the terrorist Hamburg Group led by Mohammed Atta reportedly offered its services to Al Qaeda.
However, the history which defines the motives for the September 11 attacks goes much further back.
What the public record suggests is that with the beginning of the first Bush Presidency in 1989, George H. W. Bush initiated a program of covert economic warfare to bring about the collapse of the Soviet Union. The name of this program appears to be “Project Hammer” – a multi-billion dollar covert operation whose investments remain shielded.
There is reason to believe that the plan was initially formulated by Reagan’s CIA Director, William Casey. Many of the program operatives were probably engaged through official CIA and National Security channels.
However, as a result of the experience gained by the Bush cabinet and its private sector counterparts during the secretive Iran-Contra and Ferdinand Marcos gold operations, the execution of that program would be accompanied by a new assumption that the use of covert and illegal funding for a policy not approved by Congress would remain acceptable.
The Source of the Funds
Numerous sources have documented that at the end of World War II, the treasury of the Japanese Empire was discovered in the Philippines by Edward Lansdale; a member of the staff of General Charles Willoughby who was General MacArthur’s chief of Intelligence. Lansdale and Severino Garcia Diaz Santa Romana tortured Major Kojima Kashii; General Yamashita Tomoyuki’s driver until he revealed the sites of the gold then known as the “Golden Lily Treasure”.
This mass of wealth had been accumulated by the Japanese over fifty years from the pillaging of Southeast Asia and China by its army and had been deposited in the Philippines due to the U.S. submarine blockade of Japan. Reports vary, but documents in the public domain suggest the recovered treasure was in excess of 280,000 metric tons of gold.
Lansdale briefed Assistant Secretary of War John J. McCloy about the findings, and a U.S. Cabinet-level decision was made to confiscate the gold and cover-up its discovery. The gold would be added to the Black Eagle Trust fund which took its name from the Nazi Black Eagle stamped on the gold bars confiscated from the Reich and was the original source of funding for the trust. Over the years, the significance of the Nazi gold would pale in comparison to the confiscated Japanese treasure. As the fund grew, it was distributed in private accounts across the globe in over 100 banks, and administered by General Earle Cocke.
Lansdale and Santa Romana were made responsible for recovery of the treasure. They fabricated a Communist Revolution by the Hukbalahak rebels in order to confiscate the land where much of the gold was buried, and proceeded to mine it.
The Yamashita gold would become the cornerstone of the Black Eagle Fund, from which many covert operations of the U.S. intelligence would be funded. Under international law, the gold should have been either returned to the countries from which it was stolen (as was done with the Nazi gold), or should have been incorporated into the U.S. Treasury. The U.S. Governments continued efforts to stifle news on this matter provides prima fact evidence that the confiscation of this gold was illegal.
The men responsible for initiating and executing the confiscation of Nazi and Japanese treasury gold represent the most senior Intelligence officers in the U.S. and Britain at the end of World War II, and the Cabinet of the President of the United States. The financial institutions represented by these individuals would become the major financial banks in the world, along with the Swiss-German banks where they hid their gold.
MDOK’s note: Germany is the second world largest country for Gold reserves (3,373.6 metric tons in 2017) that she has tried to repatriate from the U.S. over the past 5 years alongside other European countries.
Lansdale’s operation in the Philippines gave birth to most of the common features of modern covert operations for the U.S. Intelligence and initiated a bond between the US intelligence organizations and the Israeli intelligence.
He also set precedents for the Intelligence community to retain the services of organized crime on U.S. soil and to use drug running as a way of financing activities.
The covert operations funded by the Black Eagle Trust in the 1960s and 1970s became visible stains on the global image of the U.S. despite all efforts to keep them under cover. In an effort to clean house, President Jimmy Carter would order the retirement of over 800 covert operatives. Many of these operatives would move into private consulting and security firms and be employed as subcontractors for covert operations. Thus began a loose association of private operatives that would be referred to as “the Enterprises” in the years to come. George H.W. Bush, having been CIA Director, had many acquaintances in this group, and would work with them to restore their influence and control over U.S. foreign policy and the foreign Investment opportunities it created for their benefit. Meantime Ferdinand Marcos, the pro-U.S. dictator of the Philippines, continued to discover even more of the buried treasure and had started to sell it on the market during the 1970s with the assistance of Saudi Arabian Adnan Khashoggi.
US Intelligence operations had been siphoning off the gold for three decades. However in 1986 Vice President George Bush took over the gold from Marcos and the gold was removed to a series of banks, notably Citibank, Chase Manhattan, Hong Kong Shanghai Banking Corporation, UBS and Bankers Trust, and held in a depository in Kloten- Switzerland.
What happened to the Marcos gold after it was confiscated by U.S. agents in 1986 has never been reported, but throughout the early 1990s, the world gold market would be fuddled by the mysterious appearance of thousands of tons of gold which appeared to suppress the price of gold.
In South East Asia operations were financed through Nugan Hand Bank in Australia which would be one of the many banks used for transferring the Marcos gold from the Philippines into covert operations. Frank Nugan’s family ran the primary supply shipping operation between the U.S. Navy base in the Philippines and Australia. Frank Nugan’s business partner, Peter Abeles, and Henry Keswick, together with Canadian businessman Peter Munk, would link with Adnan Kashoggi, Sheikh Kamal and Edgar Bronfmann in a series of operations which ultimately would evolve into Barrick Gold.
In 1992, George H.W. Bush served on the Advisory Board of Barrick Gold. The Barrick operation would create billions of dollars of paper gold by creating gold derivatives. A major distribution channel for the sale of Barrick’s gold futures would be Enron. Enron would also become the vehicle by which oil and gas contracts from the former Soviet Union (vehicles for Soviet money-laundering) were processed. Barrick, which has no mining operations in Europe, used two refineries in Switzerland: MKS Finance S.A.and Argor-Heraeus S.A. both on the Italian border near Milan, a few hours away from the gold depository in Zurich. The question that Barrick and other banks needed to avoid answering is: “what gold was Barrick refining in Switzerland?”, as they have no mines in that region?
Barrick would become a quiet gold producing partner for a number of major banks, and its activities became subject to an FBI investigation into gold-price-fixing. The records on this investigation were kept in the FBI office on the 23rd floor of the North Tower which was destroyed by bomb blasts shortly before the Tower collapsed. The ultimate destination of the “Golden Lily Treasure” and the source of the loaned gold that flooded the market for 10 years have never been officially explained.
The records of many of those transactions disappeared when Enron collapsed and the trading operation and all its records were taken over by UBS, another major recipient of Marcos gold. The FBI was reportedly conducting an investigation into those transactions, and the investigation files were kept on the 23rd floor of the North Tower of the WTC. A review of the personal accounts of September 11 now suggests that office was deliberately targeted with explosives prior to the collapse of the WTC.
Another key player in the Marcos gold was Bankers Trust, which was taken over by Alex Brown & Sons, after Bankers Trust floundered financially onits Russian loans in the mid-1990s. These Russian loans were facilitated by Enron, starting in August of 1993, and very possibly were part of the “Project Hammer” takeover of Soviet industry.
Amongst those brought into the picture by the involvement of Alex Brown was J. Carter Beese who was Executive Director of the CIA at the time of September 11. He was appointed by George H.W. Bush to the board of directors of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation in 1992. Since 1992, OPIC has provided more than $4.5 billion in finance and insurance to more than 140 projects in Russia. He was also Chairman of Riggs Bank and also President of Riggs Capital Partners. Riggs controlled the famous Riggs-Valmet consultants who set up the international financial apparatus for the Russian oligarchs and rogue KGB allowing them to steal the Soviet treasury and destroy the Russian economy. Carter Beese’s death was reported as a “suicide” in 2006.
It appears that in September 1991, George H.W. Bush and Alan Greenspan did indeed finance $240 billion in bonds in a buy-out of the Soviet Union as part of a broader program to attack the economy of the Soviet Union. In addition President George H.W. Bush had initiated a number of related covert operations to take over certain sectors of the Soviet economy,
The covert business dealings with the Iranians and Israelis which originated with Kashoggi and Kimche in July 1980 in Hamburg under the “October Surprise” arrangement, would provide an opening to the Soviet KGB that would allow the U.S. to fund a coup against Gorbachev in 1991.
It would grow into a larger covert operation over the years, and be overshadowed by the larger Iran-Contra operation. Members of Bush’s covert intelligence cadre sold weapons to Iran, an avowed enemy of the U.S., and illegally used the profits to continue funding anti-Communist rebels, the Contras, in Nicaragua.
The entire Iran-Contra operation almost fell apart in 1986 and became public when the Nicaraguan government shot down a U.S. plane carrying weapons to the Contra rebels However the Iran-Contra team continued to violate the law even while being investigated by Congress.
Emboldened by the lack of consequences for subverting the U.S. constitution, and breaking international law during the Iran-Contra scandal, the Bush administration’s group known as “the Vulcans” planned a bigger drive to crush Soviet Russia.
The program also seems to have lined the pockets of the individuals that executed this policy, at US taxpayer expense. This was done to the tune of the $240 billion dollars in covert and allegedly illegal bonds, which appear to have been replaced with Treasury notes backed by U.S. taxpayers in the aftermath of September 11.
The Vulcans’ Covert Economic War on the Soviet Union
In 1988, Riggs Bank, under the direction of Jonathan Bush and J Carter Beese, would purchase controlling interest in a Swiss company named Valmet. In early 1989, the new subsidiary of Riggs called Riggs-Valmet would initiate contact with a group of KGB officers and their front-men to start setting up an international network for moving money out of the former Soviet block countries.
In the first phase of the economic attack on the Soviet Union, George Bush authorized Leo Wanta and others to destabilize the ruble and facilitate the theft of the Soviet/Russian treasury. This would result in draining the Russian treasury of between 2,000 to 3,000 tons of gold bullion, ($35 billion at the time). This step would prevent a monetary defence of the ruble and thus destabilize the currency. The gold was stolen in March of 1991, facilitated by Leo Wanta and signed off by Boris Yeltsin’s right hand man. The majority of the leaked reports from the CIA and FBI suggest the theft of the Russian treasury was a KGB and Communist party operation, but what those reports omitted was the extensive involvement of Boris Yeltsin, the U.S. CIA and the U.S. banking industry.
In November 1989 George H.W. Bush appears to have arranged for Alton G. Keel Jr, a minor player in the Iran-Contra scandal to go to work at Riggs Bank, which would become the controlling owner of a small Swiss bank operation known as Valmet. The Riggs-Valmet operation, would become the consultants to the World Bank and to several KGB front operations run by future Russian oligarchs Khordokovsky, Konanykhine, Berezovsky and Abromovich. These soon-to-be Russian oligarchs had been set-up as front men by KGB Generals Aleksey (Alexei) Kondaurov; and Fillipp Bobkov, who previously reported to Victor Cherbrikov, who worked with Robert Maxwell, a British financial mogul, an Israeli secret service agent, and a representative of U.S. intelligence interests, who had been introduced to George Bush in 1976 by Senator Tower for the sole purpose of using Maxwell as an intermediary between Bush and the Soviet Intelligence. Maxwell assisted Cherbrikov in selling military weaponry to Iran and the Nicaraguan Contras during the course of the Iran Contra deals, and made hundreds of millions of dollars available to Cherbrikov’s Russian banks. These two would bring a previously unknown politician and construction foreman named Boris Yeltsin from the hinterlands of Russia to the forefront of Russian politics through providing 50% of Yeltsin’s campaign funding.
In the second phase, there were two major operations: the largest was coordinated by Alan Greenspan, Oliver North, and implemented by Leo Wanta.
George Soros and a group of Bush appointees who began to destabilize the ruble. They are accused of fronting $240 billion in covert securities to support the various aspects of this plan. These bonds were created (in part or in whole) from a secretive Durham Trust, managed by ex-OSS/CIA officer,Colonel Russell Hermann. This war chest had been created with the Marcos gold.
Shortly before the attempted coup of 1991, Maxwell met Kruchkov on Maxwell’s private yacht. Shortly afterwards, Maxwell died mysteriously on his yacht while Senator Tower died in a plane crash under “suspicious circumstances” in April of 1991.
In the meantime, Riggs Bank was quickly solidifying banking relations with two of the old Iran-Contra scandal participants: Swiss bankers Bruce Rappaport, and Alfred Hartmann. Through this group, George Soros opened a second front assault on the ruble. It is at this stage of the operation that three more groups would be brought into the plan by Rappaport and Hartmann:
- The Russian Mafia,
- the Israeli Mossad, and
- the Rothschild family interests represented by Jacob Rothschild.
Soros and Rappaport would ensure that the Rothschild financial interests would be the silent backers for a number of the undisclosed deals. The Rothschild interests would also be seen on the board of directors of Barrick Gold.
In the fourth phase of the secret war, the Enterprise worked on several fronts to take over key energy industries. On the Caspian front of this economic war, James Giffen was sent to Kazakhstan to work with President Nazarbayev in various legal and illegal efforts to gain control of what was estimated to be the world’s largest untapped oil reserves – Kazak oil in the Caspian.
The illegal flow of money from the various oil companies would reach a number of banks. These same oil interests would engage March Rich and the Israeli Eisenberg Group, owned by one of the Mossad’s key operatives, Shaul Eisenberg, to move the oil. (The Eisenberg Group would at some point own almost 50% of Zim Shipping, which mysteriously and inexplicably moved out of the World Trade Center a few weeks before the September 11 attacks.)
Like the other events linked with “Project Hammer”, the coup was all about the money. The coup began the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the beginning of the reign of Boris Yeltsin and his â€˜familyâ€™ of Russian Mafia Oligarchs, and President Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan. In the final phase, a series of operatives assigned by President George H.W. Bush would begin the takeover of prized Russian and CIS industrial assets in oil, metals and defence. This was done by financing and managing the money-laundering for the Russian oligarchs through the Bank of New York, AEB and Riggs Bank.
A closer look at other activities leading up to these phases makes it clear that is was a U.S. orchestrated intelligence effort from the beginning. The economic war involved Gerald Corrigan of the NY Federal Reserve Bank, George Soros, an international currency speculator who was responsible for crashing the British pound a few years earlier, former Ambassador to Germany R. Mark Palmer, and Ronald Lauder-financier and heir to the Estee Lauder estate.
Palmer and Lauder would lead a group of American investors in an Operation called the Central European Development Corporation, and combine forces with George Soros and the NM Rothschild Continuation Trust. This group ended up controlling Gazprom, the Russian natural gas giant, while the Riggs group ended up controlling Yukos, the oil giant. Ownership for both remains largely hidden today, while its front men endure the hardships of the Russian wrath by spending time in prison.
Meanwhile, across the Caspian Sea, Bush had assigned a wide array of former Iran-Contra operatives to take a role in Azerbaijan. Initially, he sent in the covert operatives Richard Armitage and Richard Secord who worked with their old colleague from the Mossad, David Kimche, and their old arms running colleagues Adnan Kashoggi and Farhad Azima to hire, transport, and train several thousand Al Qaeda mercenaries to fight on behalf of the Azeri freedom fighters. Osama Bin Laden was reported to have been part of this mercenary force.
The September 11th Cover-up of the “Black Eagle Trust” and “Project Hammer”
Ten years later in 2001, these programs had finally come back to haunt the U.S. policy makers. Most, if not all of these programs appear to have stepped outside of the boundaries of the law. As a result, investigative agencies from Britain, Switzerland, Russia, Kazakhstan and the Philippines were putting pressure on Congress and the U.S. Department of Justice to open up the accounts in the banks used to finance these covert activities. Pressure was being put on the Swiss banking cartel to open its bullion records to public scrutiny. Full disclosure by these banks during an investigation would have resulted in a major exposure of U.S. Government complicity in some of the greatest financial frauds of the 1980s and early 1990s as well as 50 years of gold bullion theft by numerous U.S. and British government agencies. Moreover, investigation into these accounts would disclose a National Security secret known as the Black Eagle fund, and virtually every covert operation since World War II. Bringing an end to these investigations and preventing this disclosure was the sole objective for the destruction of the WTC and Pentagon.
These investigative and legal pressures began to accumulate in 1997, and in February 1998, Osama Bin Laden declared his fatwa, and Atta started planning the September 11 attacks. With the bonds out in the market, they had sat for ten years, like a ticking time bomb. At some point, they had to be settled – or cashed in, on September 12, 2001. The two firms in the U.S. most likely to be handling them would be Cantor Fitzgerald and Eurobrokers; the two largest government securities firms in the U.S. The federal agency mostly involved in investigating those transactions was the Office of Naval Intelligence.
On September 9/11, those same three organizations: the two largest government securities brokers and the Office of Naval Intelligence in the US took near direct hits.
What happened inside the buildings of the World Trade on September 11 is difficult, but not impossible to discern. The government has put a seal on the testimony gathered by the investigating 9/11 Commission, and instructed government employees to not speak on the matter or suffer severe penalties, but there are a number of personal testimonies posted on the internet as to what happened in those buildings that day. Careful reconstruction from those testimonies indicates the deliberate destruction of evidence not only by a targeted assault on the buildings, but also by targeted fires and explosions.
In the event that either the hijacking failed, or the buildings were not brought down, the evidence would be destroyed by fires.
Even more revealing would be the actions of the Federal Reserve Bank and the Securities and Exchange Commission on that day, and in the immediate aftermath. As one of many coincidences on September 11, the Federal Reserve Bank was operating its information system from its remote back-up site rather than its downtown headquarters. The SEC and Federal Reserve systems remained unfazed by the attack on September 11. All of their systems continued to operate. The two major security trading firms had their trade data backed up on remote systems. Nevertheless, the Commission, for the first time, invoked its emergency powers under Securities Exchange Act Section 12(k) and issued several orders to ease certain regulatory restrictions temporarily.
On the first day of the crisis, the SEC lifted a Rule 15c3-3 –Customer Protection–Reserves and Custody of Securities which set trading rules for the certain processes. Simply, GSCC was allowed to substitute securities for the physical securities destroyed during the attack.
Subsequent to that ruling, the GSCC issued another memo expanding blind broker settlements. A blind broker is a mechanism for inter-dealer transactions that maintains the anonymity of both parties to the trade. The broker serves as the agent to the principals’ transactions.
Thus the Federal Reserve and its GSCC had created a settlement environment totally void of controls and reporting “where it could substitute valid, new government securities for the mature, illegal securities, and not have to record where the bad securities came from, or where the new securities went to”; all because the paper for the primary brokers for US securities had been eliminated.
This act alone, however, was inadequate to resolve the problem, because the Federal Reserve did not have enough takers of the new 10 year notes. Rather than simply having to match buy and sell orders, which was the essence of resolving the “fails” problem, it appears the Fed was doing more than just matching and balancing it ; it was pushing new notes on the market with a special auction.
If the Federal Reserve had to cover-up the clearance of $240 Billion in covert securities, they could not let the volume of capital shrink by that much in the time of a monetary crisis. They would have had to push excess liquidity into the market, and then phase it out for a soft landing, which is exactly what appears to have happened. In about two months, the money supply was back to where it was prior to 9/11.
It was the rapid rotation of the securities settlement fails in the aftermath of September 11th that appears to have allowed the Bank of New York and the Federal Reserve to engage in a securities refinancing that resulted in the American taxpayer refinancing the $240 billion originally used for the Great Ruble Scam.
The reports published by the Federal Reserve argue that the Federal Reserves’ actions increasing the monetary supply by over $300 billion were justified to overcome operational difficulties in the financial sector.
What appears to be the case is that the Federal Reserve imbalances reported on three consecutive days in the aftermath were largely concentrated at the Bank of New York, which is reported to represent over 90% of the imbalance, suggesting the Bank had been the recipient of massive fund transfers, and unable to send out transfers. This supposedly was due to major communication and system failures. In fact, none of the Bank of New York’s systems failed or went non-operational.
“The Islamic Militant Network” and NATO join hands in Macedonia
In the wake of the 1999 war in Yugoslavia, the terrorist activities of the KLA were extended into Southern Serbia and Macedonia. Meanwhile, the KLA —renamed the Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC)— was elevated to United Nations status, implying the granting of “legitimate” sources of funding through United Nations as well as through bilateral channels, including direct US military aid. And barely two months after the official inauguration of the KPC under UN auspices (September 1999), KPC-KLA commanders – using UN resources and equipment – were already preparing the assaults into Macedonia, as a logical follow-up to their terrorist activities in Kosovo. According to the Skopje daily Dnevnik, the KPC had established a “sixth operation zone” in Southern Serbia and Macedonia:
“Sources, who insist on anonymity, claim that the headquarters of the Kosovo protection brigades [i.e. linked to the UN sponsored KPC] have [March 2000] already been formed in Tetovo, Gostivar and Skopje. They are being prepared in Debar and Struga [on the border with Albania] as well, and their members have defined codes.”
(Macedonian Information Centre Newsletter, Skopje, 21 March 2000, published by BBC Summary of World Broadcast, 24 March 2000.)
According to the BBC, “Western special forces were still training the guerrillas”, meaning that they were assisting the KLA in opening up “a sixth operation zone” in Southern Serbia and Macedonia. (BBC, 29 January 2001.)
Among the foreign mercenaries fighting in Macedonia in 2001 in the ranks of self- proclaimed National Liberation Anny (NLA) were Mujahideen from the Middle East and the Central Asian republics of the former Soviet Union. Also within the KLA’s proxy force in Macedonia were senior US military advisers from a private mercenary outfit on contract to the Pentagon as well as “soldiers of fortune” from Britain, Holland and Germany. Some of these Western mercenaries had previously fought with the KLA and the Bosnian Muslim Army. (Scotland on Sunday, 15 June 2001. See also UPI, 9 July 2001).
Extensively documented by the Macedonian press and statements of the Macedonian authorities, the US government and the “Islamic Militant Network” were working hand in glove in supporting and financing the self-proclaimed National Liberation Army (NLA), involved in the terrorist attacks in Macedonia. The NLA is a proxy of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). In turn the KLA and the UN sponsored Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC) are identical institutions with the same commanders and military personnel. KPC Commanders on UN salaries are fighting in the NLA together with the Mujahideen.
In a bitter twist, while supported and financed by Osama bin Laden’s A1 Qaeda, the KLA- NLA was also being supported by NATO and the United Nations mission to Kosovo (UNMIK). In fact, the “Islamic Militant Network” still constitutes an integral part of Washington’s covert military-intelligence operations in Macedonia and Southern Serbia.
The KLA-NLA terrorists were funded from US military aid, the United Nations peace- keeping budget as well as by several Islamic organisations including A1 Qaeda. Drug money was also used to finance the terrorists with the complicity of the US government. The recruitment of Mujahideen to fight in the ranks of the NLA in Macedonia was implemented through various Islamic groups.
US military advisers mingle with Mujahideen within the same paramilitary force, Western mercenaries from NATO countries fight alongside Mujahideen recruited in the Middle East and Central Asia.
This did not happen during the Cold war. It happened in Macedonia in 2000-2001.
Confirmed by numerous press reports, eyewitness accounts, photographic evidence as well as official statements by the Macedonian Prime Minister, who accused the Western military alliance of abetting the terrorists, the US had been supporting the Islamic brigades barely a few months prior to the 9/11 attacks.
Washington’s Hidden Agenda
U.S. foreign policy is not geared towards curbing the tide of Islamic fundamentalism. In fact, it is quite the opposite. The significant development of “radical Islam”, in the wake of the Cold War in the former Soviet Union and the Middle East is consistent with Washington’s hidden agenda. The latter has di-ambiguously consisted in sustaining rather than combating international terrorism, with a view to destabilizing national societies and preventing the articulation of genuine secular social movements directed against the American Empire.
Washington continues to support – through CIA covert operations – the development of Islamic fundamentalism, throughout the Middle East, in the former Soviet Union as well in China and India.
Throughout the developing world, the growth of sectarian, fundamentalist and other such organizations tends to serve U.S. interests. These various organizations and armed insurgents have been developed, particularly in countries where state institutions have collapsed under the brunt of the IMF-sponsored economic reforms. These fundamentalist organizations contribute by destroying and displacing secular institutions. Islamic fundamentalism creates social and ethnic divisions. It undermines the capacity of people to organize against the American Empire. These organizations or movements, such as the Taliban, often foment “opposition to Uncle Sam” in a way which does not constitute any real threat to America’s broader geopolitical and economic interests.
Erasing the History of A1 Qaeda
Since September 2001, this history of A1 Qaeda has largely been erased. The link s of successive US administrations to the “Islamic terror network” is rarely mentioned.
A major war in the Middle East and Central Asia, supposedly “against international terrorism” was launched in October 2001 by a government which had been harboring international terrorism as part of its foreign policy agenda. In other words, the main justification for waging war on Afghanistan and Iraq has been totally fabricated. The American people have been deliberately and consciously misled by their government.
This decision to mislead the American people was taken on September 11, 2001 barely a few hours after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre. Without supporting evidence, Osama had already been tagged as the “prime suspect”. Two days later on Thursday the 13th of September – while the FBI investigation had barely commenced – President Bush pledged to “lead the world to victory”.
While the CIA tacitly acknowledges that A1 Qaeda was an “intelligence asset” during the Cold War, the relationship is said to “go way back” to a bygone era. Most post- September 11 news reports tend to consider that these A1 Qaeda -CIA links belong to the “bygone era” of the Soviet- Afghan war. They are invariably viewed as irrelevant to an understanding of 9/11 and the “Global War on Terrorism”. Yet barely a few months before 9/11, there was evidence of active collaboration between members of the US military and A1 Qaeda operatives in the civil war in Macedonia.
Lost in the barrage of recent history, the role of the CIA, in supporting and developing international terrorist organizations during the Cold War and its aftermath, is casually ignored or downplayed by the Western media. A blatant example of post-9/11 media distortion is the “blowback” thesis:
“Intelligence assets” are said to “have gone against their sponsors; what we’ve created blows back in our face”. In a display of twisted logic, the U.S. administration and the CIA are portrayed as the ill-fated victims:
The sophisticated methods taught to the Mujahideen, and the thousands of tons of arms supplied to them by the U.S. – and Britain – are now tormenting the West in the phenomenon known as “blowback”, whereby a policy strategy rebounds on its own devisers. (The Guardian, London, 15 September 2001)
The U.S. media, nonetheless, concedes that “the Taliban’s coming to power [in 1996] is partly the outcome of the U.S. support of the Mujahideen – the radical Islamic group – in the 1980s in the war against the Soviet Union”. But it also readily dismisses its own factual statements and concludes, in chorus, that the CIA had been tricked by a deceitful Osama. It’s like “a son going against his father”.
The Post 9/11 “War on Terrorism”
The “blowback” thesis is a fabrication. The CIA never severed its ties to the “Islamic Militant Network”. There is ample evidence that A1 Qaeda remains a US sponsored intelligence asset. A1 Qaeda is presented as the architect of 9/11 without ever mentioning its historical links to the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI (Intelligence service).
While A1 Qaeda remains firmly under the control of the US intelligence apparatus, the US administration has repeatedly intimated that this “outside enemy” will strike again, that a “second 9/11′ will occur somewhere in America or in the western World:
[there are] “indications that [the] near-term attacks … will either rival or exceed the [9/11] attacks. And it’s pretty clear that the nation’s capital and New York City would be on any list…”(Tom Ridge, Christmas 2003)
“You ask, ‘Is it serious?’ Yes, you bet your life. People don’t do that unless it’s a serious situation.”(Donald Rumsfeld, Christmas 2003)
“Credible reporting indicates that Al Qaeda is moving forward with its plans to carry out a large-scale attack in the United States in an effort to disrupt our democratic process… This is sobering information about those who wish to do us harm… But every day we strengthen the security of our nation.” (George W. Bush, July 2004)
“The enemy that struck on 9/11 is fractured and weakened, yet still lethal, still determined to hit us again ” (Dick Cheney, July 2006)
“Another [9/11] attack could create both a justification and an opportunity to retaliate against some known targets” (Pentagon official, quoted in the Washington Post, 23 April 2006)
A terrorist attack on American soil of the size and nature of September 11, would lead — according to former US Central Command (USCENTCOM) Commander, General Tommy Franks, who led the invasion of Iraq in 2003 — to the demise of Constitutional government. In a December 2003 interview, which was barely mentioned in the US media, General Franks had actually outlined a scenario which would result in the suspension of the Constitution and the installation of military rule in America:
“A terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event [will occur] somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. (Cigar Aficionado, December 2003)
Franks was alluding to a so-called “Pearl Harbor type event” which would be used to galvanize US public opinion in support of a military government and police state. The “terrorist massive casualty-producing event” was presented by General Franks as a crucial political turning point. The resulting crisis, social turmoil and public indignation would facilitate a major shift in US political, social and institutional structures. It is important to understand that General Franks was not giving a personal opinion on this issue. His statement is consistent with the dominant viewpoint both in the Pentagon and the Homeland Security department as to how events might unfold in the case of a national emergency.
“Massive Casualty Producing Events”
The “massive casualty producing event” is an integral part of military doctrine. The destruction and loss of life resulting from a terrorist attack serve to create a wave of public indignation. They create conditions of collective fear and intimidation, which facilitate the derogation of civil liberties and the introduction of police state measures.
The September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were used to galvanize public support for the invasion of Afghanistan, which took place barely four weeks later. Without supporting evidence, A1 Qaeda, which was allegedly supported by the Taliban government, was held responsible for the 911 attacks.
The planning of a major theater war had been ongoing well before 9/11. Whereas the US military was already in an “advanced state of readiness”, well at in advance of the 9/11 attacks, the decision to go to war with Afghanistan was taken on the evening of September 11 and was formally announced the following morning. Meanwhile, NATO invoked Article 5 of the Washington Treaty and declared war on Afghanistan on behalf of all signatory member states of the Atlantic Alliance. NATO’s declaration of war based on the principle of “self-defense” was taken within 24 hours of the September 11 attacks.
Article 5 of the Washington Treaty was first invoked on September 12, 2001. America’s European Allies plus Canada offered their support in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. NATO embraced the US sponsored “Global War on Terrorism”. Fourteen NATO member states sent troops to Afghanistan.(See NATO Review, Summer 2006,
The 9/11 “massive casualty producing event” played a crucial role in the process of military planning. It provided, in the eyes of public opinion, a pretext to go to war. The triggering of “war pretext incidents” is part of the Pentagon’s assumptions. In fact it is an integral part of US military history. In 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff had envisaged a secret plan entitled “Operation Northwoods, to deliberately trigger civilian casualties to justify the invasion of Cuba:
“We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba,” .“We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington” “casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.” (See the declassified Top Secret 1962 document titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba”, See Operation Northwoods at http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NORl 1 lA.html ).
Terror Warnings and Terror Events
To be “effective” the fear and disinformation campaign cannot solely rely on unsubstantiated “warnings” of future attacks, it also requires “real” terrorist occurrences or “incidents”, which provide credibility to the Administration’s war plans. Propaganda endorses the need to implement “emergency measures” as well as carry out retaliatory military actions.
Both the terror warnings and the terror events have served as a pretext to justify far- reaching military decisions. Following the July 2005 London bombings, Vice President Dick Cheney was reported to have instructed USSTRATCOM to draw up a contingency plan “to be employed in response to another 9/1 1-type terrorist attack on the United States”. Implied in the contingency plan is the certainty that Iran would be behind a Second 9/11.
This “contingency plan” used the pretext of a “Second 9/11”, which had not yet happened, to prepare for a major military operation against Iran, while pressure was also exerted on Tehran in relation to its (non-existent) nuclear weapons program. What is diabolical in this decision of the US Vice President is that the justification presented by Cheney to wage war on Iran rested on Iran’s alleged involvement in a hypothetical terrorist attack on America, which had not yet occurred:
The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing-that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack-but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections. (Philip Giraldi, Attack on Iran: Pre-emptive Nuclear War, The American Conservative, 2 August 2005)
Are we to understand that US, British and Israeli military planners are waiting in limbo for a Second 9/11, to launch a military operation directed against Syria and Iran?
Cheney’s proposed “contingency plan” did not in the least focus on preventing a Second 9/11. The Cheney plan was predicated on the presumption that Iran would be behind a Second 9/1 1 and that punitive bombings could immediately be activated, prior to the conduct of an investigation, much in the same way as the attacks on Afghanistan in October 2001, allegedly in retribution for the alleged support of the Taliban government to the 9/11 terrorists.
It is worth noting that one does not plan a war in three weeks: the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan had been planned well in advance of 9/11. As Michael Keefer points out in an incisive review article:
“At a deeper level, it implies that “9/11-type terrorist attacks” are recognized in Cheney’s office and the Pentagon as appropriate means of legitimizing wars of aggression against any country selected for that treatment by the regime and its corporate propaganda- amplification system…. (Michael Keefer, Petrodollars and Nuclear Weapons Proliferation: Understanding the Planned Assault on Iran, Global Research, February 10, 2006)
Since 2001, Vice President Cheney has reiterated his warning of a second 9/11 on several occasions “The enemy that struck on 9/1 1 is fractured and weakened, yet still lethal, still determined to hit us again” (Waterloo Courier, Iowa, 19 July 2006, italics added).
“Justification and Opportunity to Retaliate against some known targets” In April 2006, (former) Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld launched a far-reaching military plan to fight terrorism around the World, with a view to retaliating in the case of a second major terrorist attack on America. “Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has approved the military’s most ambitious plan yet to fight terrorism around the world and retaliate more rapidly and decisively in the case of another major terrorist attack on the United States, according to defense officials.
The long-awaited campaign plan for the global war on terrorism, as well as two subordinate plans also approved within the past month by Rumsfeld, are considered the Pentagon’s highest priority, according to officials familiar with the three documents who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about them publicly.
Details of the plans are secret, but in general they envision a significantly expanded role for the military — and, in particular, a growing force of elite Special Operations troops — in continuous operations to combat terrorism outside of war zones such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Developed over about three years by the Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in Tampa, the plans reflect a beefing up of the Pentagon’s involvement in domains traditionally handled by the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department. (Washington Post, 23 April 2006)
This plan is predicated on the possibility of a Second 9/11 and the need to retaliate if and when the US is attacked: “A third plan sets out how the military can both disrupt and respond to another major terrorist strike on the United States. It includes lengthy annexes that offer a menu of options for the military to retaliate quickly against specific terrorist groups, individuals or state sponsors depending on who is believed to be behind an attack. Another attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets, according to current and former defense officials familiar with the plan.
This plan details “what terrorists or bad guys we would hit if the gloves came off. The gloves are not off,” said one official, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject.” (italics added, Washington Post, 23 April 2006) The presumption of this military document, is that a Second 9/11 attack “which is lacking today” would usefully create both a “justification and an opportunity” to wage war on “some known targets [Iran and Syria]”.
Realities are twisted upside down. The disinformation campaign has gone into full gear. The British and US media are increasingly pointing towards “preemptive war” as an act of “self defense” against A1 Qaeda and the State sponsors of terrorism, who are allegedly preparing a Second 9/11. The underlying objective, through fear and intimidation, is ultimately to build public acceptance for the next stage of the Middle East “war on terrorism” which is directed against Syria and Iran.
The threat of an A1 Qaeda “Attack on America” has been used profusely by the Bush administration and its indefectible British ally to galvanize public opinion in support of a global military agenda.
Known and documented, the “Islamic terror network” is a creation of the US intelligence apparatus. There is firm evidence that several of the terrorist “mass casualty events” which have resulted in civilian casualties were triggered by the military and/or intelligence services. Similarly, corroborated by evidence, several of the terror alerts were based on fake intelligence as revealed in the London 2006 foiled “liquid bomb attack”, where the alleged hijackers had not purchased airline tickets and several did not have passports to board the aircraft.
The “war on terrorism” is bogus. The 911 narrative as conveyed by the 911 Commission report is fabricated. The Bush administration is involved in acts of cover-up and complicity at the highest levels of government.
Revealing the lies behind 911 would serve to undermine the legitimacy of the “war on terrorism”. Revealing the lies behind 911 should be part of a consistent antiwar movement. Without 911, the war criminals in high office do not have a leg to stand on. The entire national security constructs collapses like a deck of cards. Tim Osman (Ossman) has recently become better known as Osama Bin Ladin. “Tim Osman ” was the name assigned to him by the CIA for his tour of the U.S. and U.S. military bases, in search of political support and armaments. […] There is some evidence that Tim Osman … visited the White House. There is certainty that Tim Osman toured some U.S. military bases, even receiving special demonstrations of the latest equipment.
Why hasn’t this been reported by major media?
The 21st century is going to be multipolar, because it is now only safe to say that the hegemon has lost the means of unipolarity
From a realistic standpoint, the privately-owned financial/Military/Ideological architecture which was hidden behind the United States lost its world leading position after 3 critical advantages were eventually neutralized. They were all of greatest significance and directly or partly linked to Technical Advance with a degree of appreciation ranging from relative to lethal effects. These lost advantages were:
- Leadership of global growth
- The US Dollar as global reserve currency and for international transactions (Trade between countries) due to the SWIFT system
- Airspace/military superiority
From a scientific standpoint, the deeper level of understanding amid Technological advance may fit in 4 words : Global Navigational satellite systems (GNSS). What a GNSS is, is very simple to explain. It’s a constellation of subatomic satellites on orbital trajectories in the outer space that provide both airspace-military and civilian applications. Communication (between aerospace and airspace/earth devices) is a key word. Speed, accuracy, stealthiness and impermeability are decisive attributes. As of today, constellations with global coverture are American NASA-GPS, Russian GLONASS, Chinese BeiDou (BDS) and ESA-Galileo (European constellation with a theoretical American veto on Galileo’s airspace-military independent applications with regards to GPS-Galileo coordinated integration networks and signals within NATO).
Considering vast arrays of data expertise, it is only safe to say that Russia runs, by far, the most efficient GNSS for the foreseeable future with China catching up on a fast pace. This is precisely this unmatched Russian superiority combined with China’s role as the driver of global growth under her fast industrialization that have paved the way for what I have called a “Global-sized Marshall plan for the 21st century”. Under such conditions, an Armageddon scenario is proscribed while exponential constellations of regional conflicts with kinetic and non-kinetic actions can only prove self detrimental. The US has become the 1st energy exporting nation in the world while, at the same time, China has become the first importing one. Besides, it has just launched a gold-backed currency ( oil futures or petroYuan) which makes Beijing a significant, if not the most rewarding energy price-settler, since its currency is based on real counter-value (Gold) as opposed to the dollar (Quantitative easing/speculation aka fiat currency). Also considering that technological advance as applied to Global Navigational satellite systems (GNSS) whether in their airspace-military applications or civilian domains, has now been lost to China and more critically so, to Russia for the foreseeable future, the US – or should I more precisely say the US-FED-led privately-owned Financial/ Military (US-NATO)/ Ideological structure has therefore lost its absolute advantage : the US Dollar as international reserve currency which results from the neutralization of the SWIFT system. Today, the SWIFT system can be bypassed. Various methods of payment (ex PVP) in real time can allow trade between sovereign nations in national currencies and/or even cryptocurrencies. Including a debt trap (quantitative tightening), particularly targeting emerging countries and non-state businesses having contracted loans to BRICS-China’s New development bank (NDB) which were formulated as of now in USD, would be self-detrimental as private investors would immediately rush into real-counter valued assets such as gold or New technologies (AI) investments that China and Russia lead (i.e. 5G), due to their unmatched technological advance including in nanotechnologies and genone-edition. At the same time, the U.S. national debt has gone through the roof ($21 + trillion) while including social security budgetary line has been defunded at a moment when 10,000 baby-boomers retire on a daily basis. This reality combined with over 1 Americans in 2 declaring less than 10K in savings, a considerable chunk of the population depends on Chinese cheaper manufactured goods while US entreprises need cheap labour, raw materials and semi-conductor supply chains (notably from Taïwan) in order to face competition. Similarly, attempts to vote US Congress economic and financial sanctions againt Russian aimed to eventually turn Moscow against Beijing shall all fail. So would kinetic and non-kinetic actions launched on regional theaters. This trend would only signal the last rush to capture natural resources in attempts to resist a world that has already transitioned under a Pax Sinica. From there, smart bridges must be built. The 70-year + old geopolitical partition of the world has irremediably become obsolete – or should I say- neutralized. No tyranny can last forever.
From Paris, with Love and respect, Mr President.
©Mylene Doublet O’Kane, 19 Ap 2018
MD O’Kane is an Israeli French postgraduate in Philosophy, in History of ideas, a teacher and an independent analyst in geopolitics.
Republishing of this article is welcomed with reference to TCO. The views of the author do not necessarily coincide with the opinion of the editorial board.