Know Thine Enemy #2

HISTORY OF SECRET EXPERIMENTATION
ON UNITED STATES CITIZENS


<UL TYPE=SQUARE><LI>1931 Dr. Cornelius Rhoads, under the auspices of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Investigations, infects human subjects with cancer cells. He later goes on to establish the U.S. Army Biological Warfare facilities in Maryland, Utah, and Panama, and is named to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. While there, he begins a series of radiation exposure experiments on American soldiers and civilian hospital patients.
<LI>1932 The Tuskegee Syphilis Study begins. 200 black men diagnosed with syphilis are never told of their illness, are denied treatment, and instead are used as human guinea pigs in order to follow the progression and symptoms of the disease. They all subsequently die from syphilis, their families never told that they could have been treated.
<LI>1935 The Pellagra Incident. After millions of individuals die from Pellagra over a span of two decades, the U.S. Public Health Service finally acts to stem the disease. The director of the agency admits it had known for at least 20 years that Pellagra is caused by a niacin deficiency but failed to act since most of the deaths occured within poverty-striken black populations.
<LI>1940 Four hundred prisoners in Chicago are infected with Malaria in order to study the effects of new and experimental drugs to combat the disease. Nazi doctors later on trial at Nuremberg cite this American study to defend their own actions during the Holocaust.
<LI>1942 Chemical Warfare Services begins mustard gas experiments on approximately 4,000 servicemen. The experiments continue until 1945 and made use of Seventh Day Adventists who chose to become human guinea pigs rather than serve on active duty.
<LI>1943 In response to Japan's full-scale germ warfare program, the U.S. begins research on biological weapons at Fort Detrick, MD.
<LI>1944 U.S. Navy uses human subjects to test gas masks and clothing. Individuals were locked in a gas chamber and exposed to mustard gas and lewisite.
<LI>1945 Project Paperclip is initiated. The U.S. State Department, Army intelligence, and the CIA recruit Nazi scientists and offer them immunity and secret identities in exchange for work on top secret government projects in the United States.
<LI>1945 "Program F" is implemented by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). This is the most extensive U.S. study of the health effects of fluoride, which was the key chemical component in atomic bomb production. One of the most toxic chemicals known to man, fluoride, it is found, causes marked adverse effects to the central nervous system but much of the information is squelched in the name of national security because of fear that lawsuits would undermine full-scale production of atomic bombs.
<LI>1946 Patients in VA hospitals are used as guinea pigs for medical experiments. In order to allay suspicions, the order is given to change the word "experiments" to "investigations" or "observations" whenever reporting a medical study performed in one of the nation's veteran's hospitals.
<LI>1947 Colonel E.E. Kirkpatrick of the U.S. Atomic Energy Comission issues a secret document (Document 07075001, January 8, 1947) stating that the agency will begin administering intravenous doses of radioactive substances to human subjects.
<LI>1947 The CIA begins its study of LSD as a potential weapon for use by American intelligence. Human subjects (both civilian and military) are used with and without their knowledge.
<LI>1950 Department of Defense begins plans to detonate nuclear weapons in desert areas and monitor downwind residents for medical problems and mortality rates.
<LI>1950 In an experiment to determine how susceptible an American city would be to biological attack, the U.S. Navy sprays a cloud of bacteria from ships over San Franciso. Monitoring devices are situated throughout the city in order to test the extent of infection. Many residents become ill with pneumonia-like symptoms.
<LI>1951 Department of Defense begins open air tests using disease-producing bacteria and viruses. Tests last through 1969 and there is concern that people in the surrounding areas have been exposed.
<LI>1953 U.S. military releases clouds of zinc cadmium sulfide gas over Winnipeg, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Fort Wayne, the Monocacy River Valley in Maryland, and Leesburg, Virginia. Their intent is to determine how efficiently they could disperse chemical agents.
<LI>1953 Joint Army-Navy-CIA experiments are conducted in which tens of thousands of people in New York and San Francisco are exposed to the airborne germs Serratia marcescens and Bacillus glogigii.
<LI>1953 CIA initiates Project MKULTRA. This is an eleven year research program designed to produce and test drugs and biological agents that would be used for mind control and behavior modification. Six of the subprojects involved testing the agents on unwitting human beings.
<LI>1955 The CIA, in an experiment to test its ability to infect human populations with biological agents, releases a bacteria withdrawn from the Army's biological warfare arsenal over Tampa Bay, Fl.
<LI>1955 Army Chemical Corps continues LSD research, studying its potential use as a chemical incapacitating agent. More than 1,000 Americans participate in the tests, which continue until 1958.
<LI>1956 U.S. military releases mosquitoes infected with Yellow Fever over Savannah, Ga and Avon Park, Fl. Following each test, Army agents posing as public health officials test victims for effects.
<LI>1958 LSD is tested on 95 volunteers at the Army's Chemical Warfare Laboratories for its effect on intelligence.
<LI>1960 The Army Assistant Chief-of-Staff for Intelligence (ACSI) authorizes field testing of LSD in Europe and the Far East. Testing of the european population is code named Project THIRD CHANCE; testing of the Asian population is code named Project DERBY HAT.
<LI>1965 CIA and Department of Defense begin Project MKSEARCH, a program to develop a capability to manipulate human behavior through the use of mind-altering drugs.
<LI>1965 Prisoners at the Holmesburg State Prison in Philadelphia are subjected to dioxin, the highly toxic chemical component of Agent Orange used in Viet Nam. The men are later studied for development of cancer, which indicates that Agent Orange had been a suspected carcinogen all along.
<LI>1966 CIA initiates Project MKOFTEN, a program to test the toxicological effects of certain drugs on humans and animals.
<LI>1966 U.S. Army dispenses Bacillus subtilis variant niger throughout the New York City subway system. More than a million civilians are exposed when army scientists drop lightbulbs filled with the bacteria onto ventilation grates.
<LI>1967 CIA and Department of Defense implement Project MKNAOMI, successor to MKULTRA and designed to maintain, stockpile and test biological and chemical weapons.
<LI>1968 CIA experiments with the possibility of poisoning drinking water by injecting chemicals into the water supply of the FDA in Washington, D.C.
<LI>1969 Dr. Robert MacMahan of the Department of Defense requests from congress $10 million to develop, within 5 to 10 years, a synthetic biological agent to which no natural immunity exists.
<LI>1970 Funding for the synthetic biological agent is obtained under H.R. 15090. The project, under the supervision of the CIA, is carried out by the Special Operations Division at Fort Detrick, the army's top secret biological weapons facility. Speculation is raised that molecular biology techniques are used to produce AIDS-like retroviruses.
<LI>1970 United States intensifies its development of "ethnic weapons" (Military Review, Nov., 1970), designed to selectively target and eliminate specific ethnic groups who are susceptible due to genetic differences and variations in DNA.
<LI>1975 The virus section of Fort Detrick's Center for Biological Warfare Research is renamed the Fredrick Cancer Research Facilities and placed under the supervision of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) . It is here that a special virus cancer program is initiated by the U.S. Navy, purportedly to develop cancer-causing viruses. It is also here that retrovirologists isolate a virus to which no immunity exists. It is later named HTLV (Human T-cell Leukemia Virus).
<LI>1977 Senate hearings on Health and Scientific Research confirm that 239 populated areas had been contaminated with biological agents between 1949 and 1969. Some of the areas included San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Key West, Panama City, Minneapolis, and St. Louis.
<LI>1978 Experimental Hepatitis B vaccine trials, conducted by the CDC, begin in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Ads for research subjects specifically ask for promiscuous homosexual men.
<LI>1981 First cases of AIDS are confirmed in homosexual men in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco, triggering speculation that AIDS may have been introduced via the Hepatitis B vaccine.
<LI>1985 According to the journal Science (227:173-177), HTLV and VISNA, a fatal sheep virus, are very similar, indicating a close taxonomic and evolutionary relationship.
<LI>1986 According to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (83:4007-4011), HIV and VISNA are highly similar and share all structural elements, except for a small segment which is nearly identical to HTLV. This leads to speculation that HTLV and VISNA may have been linked to produce a new retrovirus to which no natural immunity exists.
<LI>1986 A report to Congress reveals that the U.S. Government's current generation of biological agents includes: modified viruses, naturally occurring toxins, and agents that are altered through genetic engineering to change immunological character and prevent treatment by all existing vaccines.
<LI>1987 Department of Defense admits that, despite a treaty banning research and development of biological agents, it continues to operate research facilities at 127 facilities and universities around the nation.
<LI>1990 More than 1500 six-month old black and hispanic babies in Los Angeles are given an "experimental" measles vaccine that had never been licensed for use in the United States. CDC later admits that parents were never informed that the vaccine being injected to their children was experimental.
<LI>1994 With a technique called "gene tracking," Dr. Garth Nicolson at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, TX discovers that many returning Desert Storm veterans are infected with an altered strain of Mycoplasma incognitus, a microbe commonly used in the production of biological weapons. Incorporated into its molecular structure is 40 percent of the HIV protein coat, indicating that it had been man-made.
<LI>1994 Senator John D. Rockefeller issues a report revealing that for at least 50 years the Department of Defense has used hundreds of thousands of military personnel in human experiments and for intentional exposure to dangerous substances. Materials included mustard and nerve gas, ionizing radiation, psychochemicals, hallucinogens, and drugs used during the Gulf War.
<LI>1995 U.S. Government admits that it had offered Japanese war criminals and scientists who had performed human medical experiments salaries and immunity from prosecution in exchange for data on biological warfare research.
<LI>1995 Dr. Garth Nicolson, uncovers evidence that the biological agents used during the Gulf War had been manufactured in Houston, TX and Boca Raton, Fl and tested on prisoners in the Texas Department of Corrections.
<LI>1996 Department of Defense admits that Desert Storm soldiers were exposed to chemical agents.
<LI>1997 Eighty-eight members of Congress sign a letter demanding an investigation into bioweapons use & Gulf War Syndrome.[/list]
© 1998-2000 Health News

=============

US Government's Plutonium Experiments on Citizens

[From News From the Libertarian Party, November 21, 1996]

WASHINGTON, DC -- Jail time, not payoffs -- that's the way to deal with 30 years of secret, gruesome government medical experiments, the Libertarian Party said today.

"The government should not be able to buy its way out of responsibility by paying off victims with taxpayers' money," said Steve Dasbach, chairman of America's third-largest political party. "Instead, attempted murder charges should be filed against the politicians who approved secret radioactivity, chemical, and biological experiments on innocent Americans."

Dasbach's comments came after Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary announced this week that the government would pay $4.8 million to the families of 12 human "guinea pigs" who were injected with plutonium and uranium -- without their knowledge or consent -- during secret government experiments in the 1940s.

"Politicians, bureaucrats, and government employees should be held to the same standard as any other American," Dasbach said. "If an average citizen, for example, secretly injected people with highly radioactive Plutonium 239, he would be in jail facing murder charges. Instead, the government is spending $4.8 million of our money to try to buy a clean conscience."

"The use of taxpayers' money for the payoff is especially reprehensible," said Dasbach.

"If compensation is warranted, it should be in the form of victim restitution from the specific individuals responsible for the crimes," he said. "Taxpayers shouldn't be further punished for the crimes of politicians."

"First, thousands of individuals were the subjects of horrific government experiments for more than three decades," he said. "Then, Americans were kept in the dark for another two decades while the government tried desperately to cover up its crimes. Now, we're being taxed to pay off the victims of these ghoulish experiments -- while the politicians and bureaucrats who committed these crimes remain at large."

In announcing the settlement, O'Leary said the government was "grateful" to the victims for "the tough lessons they have taught us about trust, responsibility, and accountability between the government and the people."

"The real lesson this case teaches is: Government can't be trusted," countered Dasbach. "If politicians have power over our lives, they will abuse it. And the more power we give politicians, the more they abuse it. If nothing else, this tragic case should end the myth that such atrocities can't happen in America."

Despite the $4.8 million payoff, lawsuits continue to pile up from as many as 20,000 other individuals who are demanding compensation by the government for biochemical experiments conducted in the 1940s, '50s, and '60s, according to news reports.

But that's just the tip of the iceberg, noted Dasbach.

A Congressional subcommittee hearing in Washington, DC on September 28, 1994 revealed that up to 500,000 Americans were endangered by secret defense-related tests between 1940 and 1974 -- including covert experiments with radioactive materials, mustard gas, LSD, and biological agents. For example, between 1949 and 1969, the Army released radioactive compounds in 239 cities to study the effects, according to General Accounting Office testimony the hearings.

Other secret tests were conducted on prisoners, terminally ill patients, military personnel, hospital patients -- even children. At the time of the hearings, GAO officials stressed that the number of victims might increase, as new information was uncovered from Pentagon, CIA, NASA, and Energy Department files.

The Committee had its origins when public controversy developed surrounding human radiation experiments that were conducted half a century ago. In November 1993, the Albuquerque Tribune published a series of articles that, for the first time, publicly revealed the names of Americans who had been injected with plutonium, the man-made material that was a key ingredient of the atom bomb. Reporter Eileen Welsome put a human face to what had previously been anonymous data published in official reports and technical journals. "As World War II was ending," she wrote, "Doctors in the United States injected a number of hospitalized patients with plutonium, very likely without their knowledge or consent. The injections were part of a group of experiments to determine how plutonium courses through the human body. The experiments, and the very existence of plutonium, were shrouded in secrecy."

On reading the articles, Secretary of Energy Hazel O'Leary expressed shock, first to her staff, and then in response to a question posed at a press conference. She was particularly concerned because the Department of Energy had its earliest origins in the agencies responsible for building the atomic bomb and sponsoring the plutonium experiments. During the Cold War, these agencies had continued to do much of their work in the twilight zone between openness and secrecy. Now, the Cold War was over. The time had come, Secretary O'Leary determined, to make public anything that remained to be told about the plutonium experiments.

Subsequent press reports soon noted that the plutonium injections were not the only human radiation experiments that had been conducted during the war and the decades that followed.In Massachusetts, the press reported that members of the "science club" at the Fernald School for the Retarded had been fed oatmeal containing minute amounts of radioactive material. In Ohio, news articles revived an old controversy about University of Cincinnati researchers who had been funded by the Defense Department to gather data on the effects of "total-body irradiation" on cancer patients. In the Northwest, the papers retold the story of Atomic Energy Commission funding of researchers to irradiate the testicles of inmates in Oregon and Washington prisons in order to gain knowledge for use in government programs. The virtually forgotten 1986 report prepared by a subcommittee headed by U.S. Representative Edward Markey, "American Nuclear Guinea Pigs: Three Decades of Radiation Experiments on U.S. Citizens," was also recalled to public attention.

Coincidentally, the fact that the environment had also been used as a secret laboratory became a subject of controversy. A November 1993 congressional report uncovered 13 cases in which government agencies had intentionally released radiation into the environment without notifying the affected populations. At various times, tests were conducted in Tennessee, Utah, New Mexico, and Washington State.

Senator John Glenn understood the importance of national security, but he found it "inconceivable... that, even at the height of the communist threat, some of our scientists and doctors and military and perhaps political leaders approved some of these experiments to be conducted on an unknowing and unwitting public."

Were all the human radiation experiments done in secret? Are any secret or controversial studies still ongoing?

Scientists and science journalists pointed out that some of the highly publicized experiments had long ago been the subject of technical journal articles, even press accounts, and were old news; other commentators countered that, for most of the public, articles in technical journals might as well be secret.

How, why, and from what population groups were subjects selected for experiments? Some suspected that subjects were disproportionately chosen from the most vulnerable populations -- children, hospitalized patients, the retarded, the poor -- those too powerless to resist the government and its researchers.

How many intentional releases took place, and how many people were unknowingly put at risk? The answer here was sketchy; the releases identified in the November 1993 Glenn report had all been performed in secret, and much information about them was still secret.

What did our government and the medical researchers it sponsored do to ensure that the subjects were informed of what would be done to them and that they were given meaningful opportunities to consent? Today, federal government rules require the prior review of proposed experiments, to ensure that the risks and potential benefits have been considered and that subjects will be adequately informed and given the opportunity to consent. But the standards of today, many historians and scholars of medical ethics noted, are not those of yesterday. Others, however, declared that it was self-evident that no one should be experimented upon without his or her voluntary consent.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/experimentation.html

==========================================================================================

...In 1932 the United States Public Health Service (PHASE), in cooperation with the Tuskegee Institute, initiated a study in Macon County, Alabama to determine the effects of untreated syphilis. The study would last until 1970 and follow 399 black men diagnosed with syphilis.

In order to ensure that they would not be treated, which became increasingly difficult with the discovery and widespread use of penicillin after 1943, local physicians, draft boards and PHS venereal disease eradication programs were given a list of the "subjects."

The men, the most educated of whom completed 7th grade, were told they were being treated for "bad blood," a term the white doctors claimed was a synonym for syphilis in the black community. One participant responded, "That could be true. But I have never heard no such thing."

In reality, the only treatment the men received was aspirin (what the doctors chose to call "pink medicine") and an iron supplement. Having previously encountered little or no health care, the participants were delighted. "They were always glad to see us," one doctor recalled, explaining how the men showed their gratitude by giving the "government doctors" gifts. "They brought cornbread, cookies, whatever they could make, and they were very, very pleased if you ate it -- most pleased."

In order to chart the progression of the disease, the subjects were frequently, under the guise of treatment, required to give blood samples. They also were subjected to a procedure known as the "lumbar puncture" to diagnose neural syphilis.

To obtain a sample of fluid, a large needle was inserted directly into the spinal canal. This procedure was painful, and patients often suffered severe headaches. In rare cases, it can result in paralysis or even death.

Fearing word of "Dr. Vonderlehr's golden needle treatments," as the doctors referred to it, would discourage participation, whole regions were done at a time, and letters were sent out promising "Special Free Treatment" and warning "Last Chance for Special Examination."

Other inducements were free hot meals, the illusion of free medical care, an award certificate signed by the surgeon general, and a $50 burial stipend. For people living below the poverty line, a third of whom lived in shacks without plumbing, these were no small rewards.

The burial stipend was created as a solution to the problem of obtaining permission for autopsies, an important part of the study. Local doctors were relied upon to contact PHS in the event of death of a subject. This system worked well because the doctors were so honored to be participating in a national study.

Due to media exposure, the study was halted in 1970. By that time, at least 28 and perhaps as many as 100 had died as a direct result of complications caused by syphilis.

In December of 1974, the government agreed to pay approximately $10 million in an out of court settlement: $37,500 per participant. A year earlier, it had offered free medical care to the surviving participants and their families, many of whom had contracted the disease congenitally.

For obvious reasons, the survivors preferred compensatory funds with which to hire their own physicians... http://www.dreamscape.com/morgana/adrastea.htm
==========================================================================================

nullVirtually all of the U.S. and allied troops were forced (on threat of court martial, or Article 15, if they refused) to take a series of experimental vaccines and pills which had NOT been approved by the FDA and which made many of our troops instantly and violently ill

 

At least when I experiment on live subjects using the deadly new toxin i isolated from Stranger's panty-wodges (vaginus-vulgaris florabundy aboriginus narcotica-spritus) i first read them Mein Kempf,make them a fine micro-wave meal,then play them some Wagner before administering the deadly agent...offering a little dignity to ones specimens does wonders for the conscience!

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

The retards' science club??? That's pretty fuckin' twisted.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nursey:
At least when I experiment on live subjects using the deadly new toxin i isolated from Stranger's panty-wodges (vaginus-vulgaris florabundy aboriginus narcotica-spritus) i first read them Mein Kempf,make them a fine micro-wave meal,then play them some Wagner before administering the deadly agent...offering a little dignity to ones specimens does wonders for the conscience! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Poor Nursey.
You must have been dreadfull disappointed to discover that, far from turning them into the vicious, blood thirsty, rabid killers you envisioned, the became something far more hideous.
With hair instantly matting into beaded dreadlocks and eyes glazing over blood red, they developed a giddy, dazed expression on their grinning, grubby faces. Turning and hugging eachother wholeheartedly they meandered off to find a shady tree under which to contemplate shortcuts to enlightenment and sing songs of harmony and the perfect bud.

 

The UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
is the
World's Greatest
TERRORIST ORGANIZATION

The greatest acts of terrorism are not committed by furtive gangs of masked desperados in foreign lands. The most horrific acts of terrorism in world history have always been committed by governments.
The government and military of the United States of America have committed massive acts of international terrorism and brutal genocide — throughout the 20th century.

Official FBI definition of terrorism:

"Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."
By its own definition the hypocrite U.S. government is guilty of terrorism — on a massive, international scale. And for over 100 years!

The U.S. government has broken international law and the Geneva Convention many times with its brutal use of force and horrific violence against persons and property, to intimidate and coerce governments, civilian populations, and many segments thereof, in furtherance of political, social and especially economic objectives.

$ $

Terrorism at the World Trade Center

Our own evil government bears the ultimate responsibility for this disaster.

If the homicidal psychopaths of the United States military/government didn't have the nasty habit of mass-murdering civilian men, women and children around the world, there wouldn't be anybody who wanted revenge.

But whoever the real terrorists are behind the carnage, you can be absolutely sure of one thing: they're the best friends the U.S. government ever had.

This act of brutal terrorism against the American people is a propaganda gold mine for the brutal terrorists of the U.S. military/government and their corporate mass-media. Now we see the bloodthirsty hypocrites adopting public postures of patriotic "defense" while chanting "Pearl Harbor!" like a mantra. Gone are the days when the propagandists had to cobble together absurd conceptual Frankensteins like "humanitarian bombing" to sell the Pentagon's latest butchery to the American taxpayer.

Though the poor people in Manhattan paid a horrible price for America's genocidal foreign policy, this terrorist attack was nothing more than a pinprick on the body of The Beast itself. The top-level war criminals at the Pentagon and the U.S. government are not honestly upset. Far from it — they've just been handed all the political ammunition they could possibly hope for! They now have a blank check to mass-murder yet more civilian men, women and children in campaigns of state terrorism abroad. With smiles well hidden, they can now ratchet up their police-state repression at home.

Behind closed doors, out of view of the T.V. cameras, the strategists of American Empire must be positively gleeful.

Uncle Sham doesn't honestly care the slightest bit about the suffering of people in the World Trade Center, nor of people anywhere in America. American citizens are just cash cows to be herded this way and that, and perennially lied to. Keep 'em stupid and keep those tax dollars coming in.

And people around the world? Slaves and whores to be exploited to the max. If they dare attempt to be free of the American Empire, bomb them back into submission. Our evil rulers care only for preserving their own wealth and power, nothing more.

The inhuman rulers of America have cruelly abused the world with genocidal campaigns of state terrorism for over 100 years. Now they are surely thrilled with the prospect of increasing their power through new campaigns of terror and mass-murder. Let the American people pay the price for our rulers' evil, they don't care. The downward spiral of carnage and suffering will never end until we're all enslaved or dead.

If we want to live in peace and freedom, people must turn off their mind-controlling T.V. sets, wake up from their mass-media brainwashing and get a clue:

The greatest enemy of the American people is our own terrorist government and military.

See also:
Insider trading before September 11 provides strong circumstantial evidence that the CIA had prior knowledge of the World Trade Center attack.

$ $

Millions of Victims:
The Bloody "American Century"

Altogether, the terrorist U.S. government and military have directly slaughtered literally millions of civilian people in the Philippines, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Russia (the civil war, 1918-1920), Japan, France, Germany, Korea, Thailand, Indonesia, Panama, Grenada, Libya, Lebanon, Iraq, Sudan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Bosnia and Yugoslavia.

In addition, the terrorist U.S. military and CIA have trained, armed, funded, provided intelligence and direct military support for fascist puppet-regimes and right-wing death-squads around the world.

America's servant-states have carried out appallingly vicious campaigns of state terrorism. With the direct support of the U.S. government they have committed the torture and genocide of additional millions of helpless, civilian people in Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Haiti, Mexico, Cuba, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, Brazil, China, the Philippines, East Timor, Indonesia, the Congo, Angola, Zaire, Mozambique, Palestine, Israel, Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, Iraq, Pakistan and Iran.

This page gives you summaries of America's greatest campaigns of genocide and international terrorism.


"God's" Will:
The Philippine Genocide

It was just nine years after the United States Army Seventh Cavalry slaughtered 300 helpless Lakota children, women and men at Wounded Knee, South Dakota, in 1890:

In a major yet little-known campaign of the Spanish-American war, all branches of the U.S. military committed the mass-murder of 200,000 civilian men, women and children in the Philippines. This genocide was accomplished by a viciously racist United States Army, Navy and Marines, from 1899 to 1902.

$$ Why? Corporate profit. The Philippine islands were a profitable part of the old Spanish Empire. They also provided a valuable base of operations for the exploitation of China — which was far more profitable.

When the Filipinos resisted us — with the curious idea that they had a right to control their own country — American soldiers, sailors and Marines slaughtered and tortured them. Heroic American soldiers even murdered ten-year-old Filipino boys.

Thus was the American Empire born, consecrated with the blood of Philippine children, men and women. This was the point in American history when the emphasis shifted from the domestic abuse and exploitation of Indians and Africans to the even more profitable pursuits of imperialism and international terrorism.

Mark Twain condemned the genocide in scathingly cynical terms. So did others among that small percentage of Americans possessed of a human conscience.

President William McKinley, however, was of the Official Opinion that the cruel bloodshed was "God's Will." Teddy Roosevelt revelled in bloodshed and thought it was all just "Bully!" Both of them echoed the mass-media of their day: the openly racist, nationalistic, "jingoistic" "yellow journalism" of the corporate press.

Just as they do today, most Americans preferred to ignore the gory, heartbreaking details. They joined their leaders and the press in hearty applause of the genocide.

"Public opinion" was led by the nose then — as it is today.


$ $

Hiroshima and Nagasaki

In August 1945 the United States Army-Air Force committed the truly unnecessary atomic-bomb genocide of hundreds of thousands of Japanese CIVILIAN men, women and children in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These were America's supreme two acts of international terrorism.

Revenge was a secondary reason for committing these war crimes — revenge on helpless Japanese civilian people for the crimes of the Japanese military.

$$ Long term anti-Soviet military-economic strategy was the primary reason the U.S. military/government abused their newfound nuclear power just as soon as they got their hands on it. By slaughtering the helpless people of Hiroshima the U.S. military took effective control of the islands on August 6, two days before the Russians had agreed to enter the war against Japan, on August 8.

The Red Army was a formidable war-machine in WWII. It was the Soviets, not the Americans, who fought the greatest land battles in history against the Nazis. Even before the war ended, therefore, the U.S. government was plotting ways to neutralize Soviet power and influence in the post-war world.

The use of this genocidal weapon was the greatest "psy-op" of all time, an act of psychological warfare without equal for sheer depth of criminal ruthlessness. By dropping The Bomb the U.S. Corporate Mafia Government was introducing the world's governments to their new Master — with "an offer they couldn't refuse."

Such a persuasive introduction did wonders for American corporate profits in the post-war era. It won us lots of "fair weather friends" and a world of closet enemies.

The era of "The Ugly American" was announced on August 6, 1945. It continues to this day:

"The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist — McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell-Douglas, the designer of the F-15."
— Thomas Friedman
Ugly American
columnist for the New York Times

The blowhards of American Empire have no shame. Bullies never do.


$ $

The Greatest American Genocides:
Vietnam, Korea, Cambodia and Laos

From 1950 to 1953, and from 1965 to 1974 the United States of America committed the brutal genocide of literally MILLIONS of civilian men, women and children in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and Korea.

Unarmed women and old men were bayoneted, helpless children and even babies were blown away with M-16s and grenades, countless women and young girls were sodomized, raped and murdered by U.S. Army soldiers. These horrible things happened in many massacres like the ones at My Lai and Thanh Phong in Vietnam and No Gun Ri in Korea — while U.S. Air Force bomber crews spent years in wholesale slaughter of civilian people from the air.

For sheer magnitude of evil sadism and bloodlust, the Vietnam Genocide ranks as America's greatest, most vicious campaign of large-scale international terrorism ever.

The U.S. Corporate Mafia Government and military want very much for you to believe that My Lai, Thanh Phong and No Gun Ri were "isolated incidents." But the testimony of the Vietnamese and Korean people who survived, and even the admissions of American soldiers, are that these were far from isolated incidents. There were thousands of such horrible massacres.

During the Vietnam Genocide there was even an official CIA program of systematic terror, torture and mass-murder called Operation Phoenix.

Any politically honest psychologist in the world would diagnose the American troops who committed these crimes as racist, homicidal psychopaths. But to the U.S. Corporate Mafia Government and military they're just "our boys" and "our buddies."

The U.S. government, the U.S. military — and many of the American people — protect and excuse these war criminals to this day. They live among us. Sadistic American war criminals like Lt. William Calley and Capt. Ernest Medina walk the streets of America as free men. But of course they are free in body only. They have hell to pay.

Why did it all happen?

$$ Maoist China and the Stalinist Soviet Union represented a limitation on greedy corporate capitalists' huge international profits. They were gargantuan markets that couldn't be controlled. But the most serious threat by far was the international socialist ideology itself. Nothing undermines capitalism's sacred creed of selfish, venal competition more radically than the "Godless" ideology of social sharing and caring.

Meanwhile the Chinese and Korean peoples themselves deeply resented American use of Japanese collaborators in the post-war Korean puppet government. That government brutally terrorized its own people, with America's blessing. The majority of Korean people wanted the fascist Americans out of their country. The Chinese people had also suffered horribly at the hands of the Japanese and had likewise been betrayed by the U.S. government after the war. It was very natural for them to sympathize with their Korean neighbors against the foreign oppressor.

Exactly the same pattern was followed in Vietnam. After the war the American and French governments covertly allied themselves with Japanese collaborators against the Viet Minh, even though Ho Chi Minh had worked closely with Americans during the war. When he discovered the true diabolical nature of Uncle Sham, he was forced to ally himself with the only nation that would help his people — the Stalinist Soviet Union.

Corporate America knows very well that even the very idea of popular, international, democratic socialism (which the Maoists and Stalinists pretended to champion), absolutely must be suppressed. They intend to erase it from the consciousness of the world's people. They'll never succeed, of course. But the humanitarian socialist ideology is a direct threat to the profits of inhuman corporate capitalism. To survive, capitalism must slander and silence international socialism by any and all means.

The massive American propaganda machine has relentlessly slandered humanitarian socialism by equating it with the genocidal dictatorships of Mao Zedong and Joseph Stalin. The U.S. Corporate Mafia Government lie-machine trains ignorant Americans to dismiss it all under the label of undifferentiated "communism." Corporate America is determined to crush the hope and dream of popular, worldwide, democratic socialism — at any cost.

Any human cost, that is. For corporate capitalist America the well-being of millions of Asian people was (and is) not a high priority.

If Asians refused to be controlled and exploited by America — then kill 'em all! "Better Dead than Red!" was the battle cry of Americans in their genocidal wars against the Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian and Korean peoples.


$ $

The Crucifixion of Latin America

In Central America, South America and the Caribbean the U.S. Corporate Mafia Government's genocidal policies were executed throughout the 20th century, and are now continuing into the 21st century. The U.S. military, the cocaine-smuggling CIA and its fascist puppet-governments have relentlessly terrorized, tortured and murdered hundreds of thousands of civilian men, women and children in those persecuted lands.

$$ Why? Corporate profit, as always. Huge markets for American products, cheap labor to exploit and a whole hemisphere of natural resources under the exclusive domination of the United States. Bananas for the "United Fruit Company." Coffee. Sugar cane. Cocaine.

Hard to believe? Can't be that simple? Not what they tell you on T.V.? The first thing to know is that the United States government is a Plutocracy — the rule of the rich. The U.S. is not now, nor has it ever been, a genuine "democracy". It sells itself to the world as a "democracy", of course, but in actual practice the plutocratic United States government is a corporate mafia.

And a mafia will stop at absolutely nothing to protect its profits.

Why do you think the U.S. government has always strongly supported bloodthirsty, fascist dictatorships throughout Latin America? Fascist dictatorships are "corporate friendly."

Freedom-loving democracies, on the other hand, are very hard to control. In a democracy people can demand outrageous things — like living wages.

The economic interests of the Central American, South American and Caribbean peoples are naturally opposed to the economic interests of American corporations.

For over 100 years the United States Corporate Mafia Government has done everything in its power to destroy democracy in Latin America.


$ $

Genocide of the Iraqi People

From 1991 to the present day the United States Air Force and Navy have slaughtered over 200,000 civilian people in Iraq with Depleted Uranium missiles, cluster bombs, cruise missiles and other so-called "smart bombs." During the "Desert Storm" terror campaign the arsenal also included fuel-air bombs and napalm. U.S. Air Force, Navy and Army pilots even slaughtered Iraqi soldiers who were in full retreat. American pilots joked that it was like "shooting in a sheep pen".

Of course, slaughtering defenseless people with overwhelming force is a hallowed American military tradition.

$$ Why the carnage? Persian Gulf oil, of course. It had absolutely nothing to do with "Kuwaiti independence." Nor has it ever really been about "weapons of mass destruction" — the American biological and chemical weapons supplied by the U.S. government to the Iraqis for use against the Iranians.

Total control of Middle East oil is always a top priority for the U.S. Corporate Mafia Government. They'll stop at absolutely nothing to keep that essential oil flowing into the vast murder-machine of the U.S. military-industrial complex.

With the "Desert Storm" terror campaign, America entered a new high-tech phase of its perennial international terrorism.


$ $

American State Terrorism of the Yugoslavian Peoples

In 1999 there was the ugly spectacle of America, with its 18 NATO whores, butchering over 3000 civilian people all over Yugoslavia for 78 straight days and nights — flying over 40,000 sorties and once again using cluster bombs, depleted uranium missiles, fuel-air bombs, napalm, cruise missiles and other so-called "smart bombs."

These horrible weapons of mass-destruction used by cowardly American/NATO pilots literally butchered and burned alive thousands of innocent people — children, old men and women in market squares doing their shopping, people in trains, people in cars and buses, people in television stations, people in schools, doctors and patients in hospitals, people in private homes and apartment blocks — even remote villages were napalmed and cluster bombed.

Adding insult to injury, the U.S. government/military, and their corporate mass-media puppets, had the unmitigated gall to call this carnage "humanitarian intervention". But moral considerations were the last thing on the minds of the Allied Farce war criminals at the White House, the State Dept. and the Pentagon.

$$ So why would the criminal U.S. government and military bother to spend billions of your tax dollars committing mass-murder in such a small, economically struggling country as Yugoslavia?

It was part of a long-term, globalist military-economic strategy involving:

Control of the huge reserves of oil in the Caspian basin, the related oil pipelines through the Balkans, and the final stages of the subjugation of Russia (Yugoslavia's closest ally).


Control of the $5 billion worth of lead, zinc, cadmium, silver and gold ore in the Trepca mines of Kosovo. There are also 17 billion tons of coal reserves in Kosovo. Stealing all that from the people of Yugoslavia was part of a long-term strategy for destroying their economy to the maximum extent possible, thus forcing them into complete political-economic obedience to Imperialist America.


But the most important reason for the 1999 U.S./NATO terror campaign was that it was an essential part of the American Empire's long-term strategy for maintaining total military and economic domination of Europe. The governments of Western Europe had been venal whores in America's harem since 1945. Russia was on its knees economically, and most Eastern European governments were clamoring to join the U.S./NATO harem. Only the Yugoslavian government led by Milosevic refused to be abject whores.

This came as no surprise to anyone who knew Serbian history. They have a long and heroic tradition of rebellion against evil empires. Little Serbian-led Yugoslavia was the last, brave holdout.

$ $

The Geopolitical Strategy
of Imperial America

The brutal punishment of the Yugoslavian people for their attempted independence from American Imperialism was an essential part of America's overall geopolitical strategy. The U.S. made an example of them as a warning to the other nations of Europe and the world.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, America's Western European harem has been seeking, demurely of course, to become economically and militarily independent from their American Master. But only a sufficiently large alliance of European states will make independence from America possible. That is why, from 1945 onwards, the United States government has been engaged in a permanent campaign of covert subversion of all tendencies toward European unity.

The whoring government of Britain is a close ally in this endeavor for three basic reasons. First, the cultural and linguistic ties with America make an alliance very natural. Secondly, the island nation has always seen itself as separate from the rest of Europe anyway. Thirdly, the British government seeks to profit, economically and politically, from it's close relationship with American state terrorists.

The political "profit" is the illusion of national prestige. Because Britain gave birth to the American Beast, this pompous and increasingly techno-fascist island government cherishes feelings of parental superiority. But it also suffers from an addiction to basking in America's reflected "glory". By craven loyalty to their child-turned-Master, the British government and military can still savor a small taste blood and lost Empire.

The other Western European concubines are not quite so depraved in relation to their Master. Uncle Sham knows this very well, of course, and he keeps a close and distrustful eye on all of them. With no common enemy like the Soviet Union to use as a propaganda scapegoat, the U.S. government is very concerned that increasing numbers of Western European people are beginning to get a clue that Imperial America, with its corporate McCulture, is their worst enemy. In fact, plutocratic America seamlessly followed the Nazis as Europe's greatest, most insidious enemy after the end of WWII.

After the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991, the U.S. government and its closet-Nazi allies in the German government and military openly encouraged the breakup of independent-minded Yugoslavia — while covertly arming, training and funding the ethnic warfare that resulted. The U.S. and Germany supported every ethnic group against the Serbians for two reasons:

The aforementioned fact that the Serbians, true to their historical tendency, sought freedom from Imperial American domination. The Serbians fought the Ottoman Turkish empire, the Austro-Hungarian empire and the Nazi German Third Reich. The Yugoslav government under Tito maintained a high degree of political independence even from the Soviet Union.


The Serbian people have close ethnic, linguistic and historical ties with the Russian people. So the fact that the United States and Germany formed an alliance to mass-murder Serbians has reopened deep wounds among the Russian people. The memory of Nazi German atrocities is very much alive within Russia. 20 million Russian, Ukranian and Byelorussian people died horribly at the hands of the Germans in WWII.
The U.S. government knew exactly what it was doing by using Germany as an ally against Serbia. It did so for the express purpose of reopening these old wounds among the Russian people.

There is one thing which the geopolitical strategists of American Empire have feared above all else for over 100 years: a strong and enduring German-Russian alliance. Such an alliance would not only dominate Europe, it would be powerful enough to check American Imperial ambitions around the globe, just as the Soviet Union did.

After Otto von Bismarck united Germany, the possibility of an alliance between the Kaiser and the Czar was a major threat to the British Empire. It became a serious potential threat to the American Empire too, after it was founded in the blood of Philippine women and children in 1899.

Then the feudal Czarist regime was overthrown by the Bolsheviks in 1917. There was strong socialist movement in Germany also, and therefore a very real possibility that the German working class would liberate itself and form an alliance with the Russians. The U.S. military intervened in Russia's civil war from 1918 to 1920, supporting the forces of feudalism. Meanwhile, the political-economic support of American corporations for the Nazi Party helped to destroy the German socialist movement. That would seem to have guaranteed that capitalist Germany and Stalinist Russia would form no alliance for the foreseeable future.

Adolf Hitler had many friendly connections with the American corporate plutocracy. His rise to power was politically and financially supported by corporations like the Ford Motor Company, the Union Banking Corp. of Prescott Bush (grandfather of "President" G.W. Bush), and IBM. These were just three of the wealthy and powerful American corporations that made a lot of money by quietly doing business with the Nazi Third Reich. Hitler was a staunch capitalist, and the pro-Nazi segment of the American plutocracy knew that if Adolf could be controlled he would serve American interests well. To their dismay, however, they discovered that Hitler was about as controllable as a rabid dog. When he made an alliance with Stalin just prior to WWII, it looked like the plan had backfired in a big way.

Intense American political-economic pressure was undoubtedly behind Hitler's sudden backstabbing of Stalin with the apparently irrational decision to invade Russia in 1941. As the bestial German armies burned and raped and butchered their way east, many a sigh of relief was heard among the corporate rulers of America. The animalistic atrocities committed by German soldiers against helpless Russian and Serbian women and children guaranteed that there would be deep animosity between the German and Russian peoples for many generations to come.

And then the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. Russia mutated into a venal capitalist mafia state, and the Russian people finally had something politically in common with America, Germany and the rest of Europe.

Contrary to the public breast-beating by American politicians about the "death of socialism" and the "triumph of capitalism," however, the more intelligent elements of the American plutocracy were actually not at all happy with this development. Not only had they lost a political scapegoat and primary reason for the gargantuan military budget, but they knew Russia would forge closer economic ties with its European neighbors. And this would inevitably lead to the sort of powerful alliance which American geopolitical strategists have always feared.

The immediate tactic of the American plutocracy was to do everything possible to weaken Russia economically and politically, and also to encourage the reopening of as many ethnic wounds and animosities as possible between Europeans, especially between Russians and Germans. That's what the U.S./German-sponsored breakup of Yugoslavia was all about. It culminated in the 1999 U.S./NATO terror campaign, during which Germany was a major participant and staging area for airstrikes against innocent Yugoslav civilian people.

In Germany's very first military campaign since the fall of the Third Reich, it once again mass-murdered Yugoslavian people, just as the Luftwaffe and Hitler's evil armies did from 1941 to 1944.

And once again the American plutocracy was triumphant, succeeding spectacularly by their inhuman strategies. The deep wounds were reopened, thousands of people were brutally murdered by American/NATO bombs, the surviving relatives and loved ones are heartbroken, tens of thousands of people are severely traumatized, and millions more are impoverished. What fun! The diabolical American ruling class couldn't be happier.

$ $ $

This "divide and conquer" strategy is an old one, of course. It was the classic strategy of the British Empire, and it's the most basic strategy of their American replacement.

And with the 1999 terror campaign against the entire population of Yugoslavia, the U.S. Corporate Mafia Government and military once again made a bloody example of a courageous people who dared to be free. Once again America bellowed and pounded another hamfisted warning to the world: "Bow down to US, you lowly whores! The American Beast still reigns supreme!" And most of the world's venal governments readily groveled before their evil Master.

Of course when Uncle Sham speaks to the T.V. cameras he puts on his smiling mask and prattles soothingly of all things "democratic" and "humanitarian". But the high-tech gun he has pointed to the world's head sends an altogether different message.

Ruthless competition is The American Way, after all.


$ $
Just who is the real "Rogue State" here?

$$ Selling State Terrorism $$
to the American People

And so it goes, year after year, decade after bloody decade. Just when you'd think our cruelly greedy government must surely have plumbed the depths of violent, ruthless power lust and shameless hypocrisy — America manages to go crashing through the basement floor yet again.
Totally ruthless though our evil, plutocratic government is, it's not profoundly creative at home. It doesn't have to be, because most Americans are credulous morons, politically. The U.S. government and its corporate mass-media propaganda machinery use essentially the same deceitful M.O. year after year to sell American state terrorism to the American people — while the American Empire they don't even know exists subjugates yet more hapless people abroad. While bourgeois Americans grow yet more jaded, arrogant, amoral and brainwashed.

Hey, why change horses in the middle of a stream? If a scam works, it works. And it works only because too many Americans don't mind being lied to. Not as long as they've "got their share."

Or shares, that is. Of inhuman corporations.

Thanks to money and technology alone, America, "the world's Lone Remaining Superpower" remains also the world's Supreme Terrorist Nation. The biggest, baddest bully on the block.

Only a total jerk could be proud.

(Of course, the bigger they are, the harder they fall... )


$$ In Gold We Trust $$

All hail the great symbol
$$ American Corporate Plutocracy $$


The Brutal Consistency
of America's Ugly History

Waking up to all of this can be quite a shock — if you've got a human conscience. Liberating ourselves from a lifetime of brainwashing isn't easy. But the grim modern realities of American terrorism are less surprising when you realize that this ruthless mass-murder of helpless civilian people internationally is actually quite consistent with America's domestic history...


The Indian Genocide

"The destruction of the Indians of the Americas was, far and away, the most massive act of genocide in the history of the world."
— David E. Stannard
historian

In spite of that fact, the typical, mentally-sleeping American remains only vaguely aware of the horrific holocaust of American Indians. Yet every single locality where Americans make their homes today is consecrated to the cause of cruel, racist inhumanity — with the blood of Indian people. Every single locality where Americans make their homes today is the scene of the murder, rape, torture and impoverishment of the Indian people who lived there first.

But mainstream Americans would choke on their apple pie if they dared to think about that. Too many Americans would rather stick their heads in the sand about our evil history — just as they stick their heads in the sand about what is happening today.

In the centuries after Christopher Columbus the Butcher, more than 100 million native people fell under the sadistic, racist rule of the invading European-Americans.

$$ Land is wealth, and Americans lusted for it. They couldn't let a minor fact like the existence of millions of human beings already living on that land get in their way. So the policy of genocide, thievery, routine lying and racist cruelty was justified with whitewashes like "Manifest Destiny" — America's domestic version of "Deutschland Uber Alles."


Black Slavery

Where the native peoples were all murdered or pushed out, the European and American businessmen of that day replaced them with enslaved people purchased in Africa.


$$ The international slave trade was one of the earliest examples of international corporate evil.

Fortunately, it has become impossible in recent years to hide the historical facts of this cruel, greedy American institution of slavery. The thoroughly evil abuse of African peoples took place for over 200 years, with another 100 years of virtual slavery — complete with the KKK terror tactics of lynching, torture, bombing, cross burning and general, public abuse and intimidation.


White Slavery

$$ The existence of White slavery in America is one of the most little-known facts of American history. Colonial America was initially built with the blood, sweat and tears of White slaves to a far greater extent than Black slaves. In fact, America's first slaves were White people.

It's estimated that fully one-half to two-thirds of all White "immigrants" to Colonial America in the 17th and 18th centuries were actually slaves who had been brought against their will. They were known by the euphemism of "indentured servants," but in reality a great many of these people were true slaves. Their servitude was for life, and their children were forced to be slaves as well.

Most of them were brought from Ireland, Scotland and the impoverished working classes of England. They were both Protestant and Catholic, victims of religious wars and the inhuman greed of the English ruling classes. Very often the victims were falsely labeled as "criminals" to ease the guilty consciences of the wealthy ruling classes.

When White slaves arrived in the American colonies they were auctioned on the block just like Black slaves. White slave children were often sold and separated from their parents and White slave women were sold and separated from their husbands.

A great many White slaves were forced to work under cruel and demeaning conditions. The Virginia Colony prescribed "bodily punishment for not heeding the commands of the master." Half of the White slaves died within the first two years after their arrival in "the New World."

Unsurprisingly, it was common for White slaves to run away — only to be hunted down and returned to their evil masters and mistresses. To help identify runaways the courts in Virginia demanded that everyone have identification and travel papers. White slaves had no rights whatsoever and could be beaten and cruelly abused with impunity.


Conclusions

If you are a genuinely honest person you can come to only one moral conclusion about all of this:

What Terrorist America has done for centuries
AND WHAT IT CONTINUES TO DO TODAY
is just plain EVIL.

$ $

HISTORY PROVES
that America, the self-proclaimed champion of "human rights" and "democracy", has, in reality, worked long and hard to "Make The World Safe" for an inhuman corporate PLUTOCRACY.

$ $

HISTORY PROVES
that the
United States Corporate Mafia Government
is the worldwide Enemy of Democracy
and of Humanity itself.

$ $

This is the simple truth
of the U.S. government,
past and present:

American domestic and foreign policy is now, and has always been, dictated fundamentally by economics — not by moral and political values.

All the talk of "democracy" and "human rights" is just so much spin for popular consumption.

It has never been "We the People," but a ruling plutocracy of ultra-wealthy landowners and corporations that have been the ultimate power behind the U.S. government from the beginning.

If you're intellectually honest, if you've got a social and political conscience — especially if you have the guts to ACT on it — you discover real fast that we in America are not living in a "democracy."

America is a Police State — NOW.

WAKE UP
AND SMELL THE TEAR GAS,
AMERICA!

THERE'S BLOOD ON THE STREET
BY THE CORNER CAFE

Witness Seattle. Witness Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Detroit, D.C., New Jersey and New York City.

Witness our techno-fascist FUTURE
if We The People don't claim our democratic power.

The U.S. government cannot and will not be reformed.

Therefore, there is only one genuine solution:

The American People
must non-violently overthrow the
United States Corporate Mafia Government
completely, and replace it with a DEMOCRACY.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it."
— Abraham Lincoln
First Inaugural Address
March 4, 1861

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stranger:
Poor Nursey.
You must have been dreadfull disappointed to discover that, far from turning them into the vicious, blood thirsty, rabid killers you envisioned, the became something far more hideous.
With hair instantly matting into beaded dreadlocks and eyes glazing over blood red, they developed a giddy, dazed expression on their grinning, grubby faces. Turning and hugging eachother wholeheartedly they meandered off to find a shady tree under which to contemplate shortcuts to enlightenment and sing songs of harmony and the perfect bud.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

CUNT!!!YOU KNEW ALL ALONG!!!

 

The Enemy is Very Much Within
Source: http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495&article=9312

"The enemy is very much within"

Sat Sep 15 12:38:35 2001


Robert Sterling
Editor, The Konformist http://www.konformist.com
top_viewer@y...

** URGENT **
PLEASE FORWARD AS FAR AND WIDE AS POSSIBLE

9.13.01
AF Intel source: pro-Bush gov't factions 'absolutely' behind
Tuesday's mass
devastation!

-- "The enemy is very much within"

TOP_VIEW has just conducted a brief yet immeasurably important phone
interview -- set up by a trusted and totally reliable intermediary
already
known to us -- with an Air Force Reserve intelligence specialist.

The interview was carried out this evening, over two days after the
incredible death and devastation that took place in New York City and
Washington D.C.

Our Air Force source told us his superiors had activated him at about
10 AM
Tuesday morning.

He absolutely refused to permit us to record the conversation, even
though he was speaking into some kind of electronic gizmo that
substantially altered the sound of his voice; making him sound like
Darth Vader with a serious chest cold. Some portions of his
statements were unintelligible, and he refused to repeat several of
these. Although this source was somewhat taciturn and close-lipped,
for the most part he was cooperative in terms of giving us enough
time to transcribe what he was saying. Overall what is stated plainly
and unequivocally is of absolutely paramount importance for every
single person in this nation and the world: certainly among those of
us who value our inalienable human rights and liberties and want them
to remain un-imperiled, un-abrogated and unabridged.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

TOP_VIEW: We'd like to hear what you have to say about the events on
Tuesday. First of all, I assume you have knowledge of the events that
goes above and beyond what the public is being told by the media and
the government?

Intel source: That's quite correct.

TOP_VIEW: Can you -- are you able and willing to relay this
information to us?

Intel source: Well, that depends. Some of it. You're going to publish
this?

TOP_VIEW: On the Internet.

Intel source: It's essential that nothing which could possibly be
used to identify myself or "**" (our intermediary) is made public.

TOP_VIEW: We totally understand. Completely. That's exactly how it
will be, and --

Intel source: You've known "**" a long time?

TOP_VIEW: For about 6 years, sir.

Intel source: So... he'll vouch for you? (Chuckles) Fire away.

TOP_VIEW: Well... it's becoming increasingly clear that certain
federal government sectors had prior knowledge of the destruction
carried out on Tuesday. Would you concur with this?

Intel source: (unintelligible)

TOP_VIEW: Excuse me? I didn't understand you.

Intel source: Never mind.

TOP_VIEW: Is it true that our government knew what was going to
happen?

Intel source: You could say that. Actually there are certain (pause)
groups in our government who pretty much ran the whole show.

TOP_VIEW: Are you saying that there was cooperation and collaboration
between elements of our government and the perpetrators?

Intel source: No. What I'm saying is that these groups (within the
federal government - TV) were the perpetrators of the action, right
down the line from top to bottom.

TOP_VIEW: This is really incredibly shocking, what you're saying
here. Did I understand correctly, that you say elements of the
federal government were the prime force behind these so-called
terrorist attacks Tuesday?

Intel source: That's correct. Absolutely.

TOP_VIEW: God, what a horrifying thing to come to grips with! What is
your feeling about this sir, and exactly why are you even talking to
us about this? Are you positive about what you're saying?

Intel source: (laughs) What should I answer first? I would never make
this kind of statement without being fully certain it was factual. My
own feeling is that it's completely sickening. It's repugnant and
unacceptable and I'm completely opposed to what was done. But it's
true and we all have to deal with it. There are forces within our
government who are completely determined to change the structure of
our society at the most basic level, and these are the kind of things
they're going to be doing to make sure that (fundamental changes in
our society) happens.

TOP_VIEW: What's going on in the military right now with regard to
what's occurred? Do many military higher-ups know this, and if so
what's their position?

Intel source: (unintelligible)

TOP_VIEW: Excuse me?

Intel source: I said some do know and some don't. Some wouldn't
believe it, just like many citizens wouldn't believe it. There are
certainly lots of conflict going on at the upper levels of the
military right now between people aware of the true facts.

TOP_VIEW: What about yourself?

Intel source: I consider myself to be a patriotic American who
believes strongly in the Constitution. I'll do whatever is in my
power to uphold and defend those principles, and so will many others.

TOP_VIEW: Well that's something I wanted to get to. The primary
motivation for an atrocity of this magnitude would seem to be to
soften up the country for some serious curtailment of civil
liberties, in the name of protecting us from such "terrorist"
attacks. I've likened it to Hitler's burning of the
Reichstag in Germany.

Intel source: That's a good comparison. (Unintelligible)... one of
the main reasons the action was carried out Tuesday. There's also
other agendas having to do with control of the Middle East oil
fields, and things related to that (issue).

TOP_VIEW: Well, are people such as yourself in any way prepared to,
or able to, oppose these forces?

Intel source: Speaking for myself, I'd say there's a lot I'm prepared
to do and will do. Speaking to you is one of those things. And there
are many more like me.

TOP_VIEW: Now, how does the attack on the Pentagon figure into this
whole thing?

Intel source: I can't discuss that at all.

TOP_VIEW: Can you some time in the future?

Intel source: Maybe. I think I'll need to sign off here soon.

TOP_VIEW: Is there anything else in particular you'd care to say, any
advice or whatever?

Intel source: I'd say that our way of life is facing the biggest
threat in our history, and the enemy is very much within. VERY MUCH
WITHIN.

TOP_VIEW: So it boils down to: what happened on Tuesday was an inside
job?

Intel source: Absolutely. All the way down the line and to a much
higher level than most of you could ever imagine. There's a very
intense struggle going on within our government like I said.

TOP_VIEW: It's a struggle we're all involved in, sir.

Intel source: That's quite true.

TOP_VIEW: It seems very clear to me that the Bush administration was
way involved in the attacks. Would that be correct? They obviously
want to bring about the exact kind of fundamental social
restructuring that you mentioned.

Intel source: It's a good bet. Right now, it's best we cut this short.

TOP_VIEW: Good night and thank you very much for speaking with us.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This concluded our short but vastly significant interview with a
patriotic Air Force intelligence officer.

Folks, we've heard it from the proverbial horse's mouth. Americans
are in the most critical struggle in our entire history, and the
enemy is a deceptive, malevolent and indeed demonic force deeply
ensconced within the very fabric and structure of our federal
government, and which also infests even our news and information
sources, our entertainment, our schools and workplaces and many other
aspects of our life and our society.

As our source stated: "the enemy is very much within."

 

*REICHSTAG fire. Adolph Hitler burned down the German parliament and falsely blamed his enemies and had them rounded up and put in the concentration camps.

 

This transcript appears in the September 28, 2001 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
LaRouche: Calm Down!
The Enemy Is Right
Here In the U.S.A.
On Sept. 18, 2001, Lyndon LaRouche held a wide-ranging interview with Executive Intelligence Review Managing Editor John Sigerson. The transcript of the interview follows. It is also available as an audio archive.

Sigerson: Lyn, it's one week after the attacks on the Pentagon, and on the World Trade Center. You have been making comments over the whole week about that, starting with the events as they were going on last Tuesday. What do you have to say to the American people now?

LaRouche: The point is, the first thing is, people are frightened—the first consideration. The nature of the events is frightening, especially for this generation, and most of this population. They are showing signs of great anxiety; of course, most acute in the D.C. area and the New York area. Under these conditions, people tend to become suggestible. They tend to have fantasies, exert bad judgment.

Now, the first thing a commander does under conditions of war—and there are certain things about this situation which are analagous to war, in the real sense. You must have your troops, the fighting troops, not panic-stricken, calm, realistic, don't try to pump them up with false confidence, but a realistic view of the situation, and a sense that you are effectively in charge. And that's what the American people need now, as opposed to what CNN, for example, and Fox News have been doing with their television broadcasts. The worst possible thing you can do to the American people, to cause the worst kind of crisis.

Look at the situation.

First of all, what has happened to the United States is on last Tuesday, the 11th, it came attack by a mysterious force, which I know is some kind of rogue operation inside the security screen of the United States. This did not come from the Middle East. It didn't come from Europe. It didn't come from South America. There may be people who are nationals from other parts of the world who were involved in this, but the operation is very sophisticated, and no one could do an operation like this, from outside the United States at present; there's no one who could do what was done here then.

So, we know it's a very high-level rogue operation inside our own country.

Now, that's not the only problem. When something like this happens, many other things begin to go wrong. People who are crazy, begin to do crazy things. People who are frightened, can be set off, shall we say, by these kinds of events, will do crazy things. So you have a general insecurity situation inside the country.

So, you've got to calm the thing down. The President doesn't know who's behind this yet—I think that's a fairly safe thing to say. But we have to approach from a command standpoint, as like a hunter. What a hunter does, as opposed to the bang-bang guy who goes out with a gun and shoots in all directions, hoping to see something: a hunter stalks his prey in a very systematic way. What the hunter does, is reads the spoor, and try to read the mind of that species of animal. Identify the species, identify the spoor, read the spoor, find out what kind of animal you're up against. With an animal.

Now, we're trying to find the perpetrators of this crime, not just to punish them, but to prevent them from doing what obviously they intend to do, something similar, worse, than they did on the 11th of September. So, therefore, you have to have a sense of a government which knows what it's doing, in defining who the enemy is, reading the enemy's mind from his spoor and from his capabilities, going at the problem in a systematic way, and turning to the American people and saying, "Here's what our situation is. Yes, we have an enemy within. It's a very powerful, very dangerous enemy. We don't know how far he's prepared to go, but we must conclude he's prepared to go further than he did on the 11th of September. But we're in charge. We're taking the following measures." That kind of thing.

You've got to give the American people a sense—and particularly the American people—a sense that you care for them, that you understand their problems, that you're in charge and you're taking responsibility. And you've got to calm them down, with a sense, that kind of approach.

That's what I tried to do in the course of the broadcast. I was talking to Jack Stockwell during this broadcast, and Jack and I, in a sense, were talking to each other, but we were both aware of the large listening audience on the radio from that station at that time. And we knew that would be picked up and relayed to other parts of the country. And therefore my job, as, for example, a Presidential candidate, someone who knows what it is to be President, is to say to the American people what I would say as President, and hope that would echoed by the actual incumbent, sitting President in the next phase. And that's what's needed at this time.

There are no guarantees. I think we can lick the problem. But if the American people go crazy, or if they're terrified by what CNN and Fox News and others are doing to them in the mass media, then we're in real trouble.

Sigerson: Do you think the President is going to follow your advice?

LaRouche: I think there are probably by now, there are indications that there are a number of the institutions of the United States who probably agree with me, and probably are thankful for what I did. I certainly know that many governments abroad, or leading circles in those governments, do agree with me.

I think that some of these people who are experts, have the ear of the President as his advisers, I think that they are reporting to him the kinds of things that I would wish them to report to him. There's still a lot of confusion. Still a lot of things are being said, and by others, and things aren't being done that should be done. But I think that to some degree, some of the message is getting through. I just hope, enough of the message, and I hope in time.

Sigerson: On another question, there's obviously a large, at least according to the media, a large buildup for some kind of military operation in Afghanistan, as a punishment for Osama bin Laden, it seems. Do you think the United States should go into Afghanistan?

LaRouche: No, not at all.

There may be a reason to do something like that, but at this point there is no reason to anticipate going into Afghanistan, or any other country, at this time.

The practical thing is to get a Middle East peace immediately, to end this war which is going on in Israel, in the area of Israel, to bring about peace there. You would hope that Sharon would cooperate with us, and realize that what he's doing, in avoiding the kind of peace process which Oslo set into motion, that he's actually contributing to a great danger to the United States, and many other countries at this time. Therefore, we would hope he would come to his senses, with other Israeli leaders, and work to calm this thing down. Because that's our major danger.

Our major problem is inside the United States. There are two things we have to consider. It is not accidental that this attack, on us, occurred at precisely the time that the ongoing international monetary and financial collapse was reaching a peak point, a point of crisis. And things like this, happen in times like this. So obviously, some very powerful group of people, inside our country, perhaps with some cooperation from outside, but essentially inside our country, decided to do the equivalent of a coup d'etat against the United States. Which meant, methods of terror to make the population malleable, to accept what they're to do, and at some point, come forward, and actually represent a new kind of government of the United States, to replace the present government. That's their objective.

So therefore, one of our things we have to do, we have to preempt this, by dealing with the financial and monetary crisis now.

For example, right now the airline system of the United States is crashing. Not that the planes are crashing, but the finances are crashing. We can't have that. We cannot allow the essential airline industry, which is a part of our national infrastructure, to collapse. Therefore the government must step in, not with a bailout of Wall Street, but with a plan to supply credit and reorganization—that is, government-protected reorganization of the airline industry—to ensure this thing functions. And to give them a plan which would, perhaps over a year, or 10 years or 20 years, allows the industry to come back to full self-sustaining stability. That kind of protection.

There are other things we must do. So therefore, the first thing is to realize we must act upon the general nature of the world situation, the effects of the international monetary and financial crisis, which is a point of danger. Things like the Middle East war, which must be calmed down, a point of danger. We must win the confidence of the American people for measures of this type. And we must act.

In that process we will weaken the potential of the enemy who is now preparing to strike again. And if we make the American people aware of this, then no coup d'etat could be successful in the United States. Then the enemy is morally, and politically, defeated, whatever power he represents. Those, I think, are the immediate objectives.

Sigerson: So, you have talked a lot in the past about a Pearl Harbor effect in the population, as being the only way to get the American population to effectively act, to realize the kind of solutions that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was able to implement, following Pearl Harbor the last time. So you're saying, that this crisis, which some people have also compared to Pearl Harbor, could also have that effect.

LaRouche: Well, I had hoped to avoid anything like a Pearl Harbor effect. My view was, that—I had made certain proposals. Numbers of people around the world, including people close to the Vatican, for example, leading Italian politicians, or Senators, and members of the House of Deputies, and others. People from all over the world had endorsed my proposal for a New Bretton Woods, which means: address the present financial crisis, by admitting that the system we've had for the past 30 years, has failed.

What Nixon set into motion in August 1971, the so-called floating exchange rate system, measures taken by Carter afterward, have been the biggest catastrophe the United States has faced economically in the 20th century—it was a mistake! So, between 1945 and the middle of the 1960s, despite all the mistakes that were made in the period, we had an economy that worked. Europe recovered from a war and depression. South American survived. Japan was rebuilt. Other parts of the world benefitted. Some didn't. We didn't have cooperation with everybody, but it worked. The old system.

So, I said, simply, the American people are not prepared yet, nor other nations, to experiment with some new-fangled kind of approach. They are prepared to say, "This system isn't working. Hey, please, let's go back to the one that did work." And therefore, if you would have enough political figures who would make that decision, and announce it to the American people, you would find a sudden change in the attitude of the American people. Because people, like our Americans, they're frightened people. They don't tell the truth. They deny things that frighten them. They pretend that something else is the problem, rather than the thing that frightens them the most. They will not face up to the idea of a general financial collapse, which threatens their bank, which threatens their employment, which threatens their community—they will not face this reality, unless first, as Franklin Roosevelt understood this very clearly: you have to say, "We know your problem; we're going to deal with it."

At that point, when people have a credible offer of a solution for their problem, they will now admit the problem exists. Under those conditions, if enough American people, leaders, had said to the American people during the year 2000, during the Presidential election campaign, "This is the situation. This is what we have to do about it, this is what we have to be prepared to do." The American people would have listened—or most of them. And politicians would then have the support of the American people, and we would have this thing under control.

If you don't deal with a problem like this in a timely fashion, if government says, as the Gore campaign, and the Bush campaign said in the year 2000, "We're not going to talk about it." Not a single one of them said a word about the worst financial crisis in history, which was coming on down then. Not a word. They're running for President. The biggest thing anyone's going to face as President in the year 2001, is the worst financial crisis in modern history. Not a word. Not a whimper. They left the American people exposed psychologically, to the impact of something for which the American people were not prepared, psychologically.

If you try to run an operation like that, and you keep postponing; you pretend it's not true—"Oh no, the market will always rebound," things like that. When it hits, the shock will drive people into a state of anxiety, where their behavior becomes unpredictable, highly irrational, and dangerous. And that happened.

So now we've come to a Pearl Harbor effect. As I saw in that famous Sunday in December 7, 1941, as I was walking the streets of New York that morning, Manhattan, and it was a strange atmosphere in the streets. It was Sunday. The streets were largely deserted. I walked into a hotel lobby where I had a business appointment, and I found out what was happening—Pearl Harbor had been struck. And during the rest of that day, people were running looking for the recruiting offices, military recruiting offices. In panicked mobs. "I want to join up, I want to join up." So, that was a Pearl Harbor effect which changed the behavior of the American people in one day.

And we've come to that time where we have a Pearl Harbor-like effect, not a good one, but an effect, and therefore we have to change now. So therefore, the leaders have to respond to this reality, and reassure the American people, not with phoney promises, but reassure in a way that makes the American people ready to face the problem. And then work on the solutions.

Sigerson: You said that the enemy is within. Do you expect further attacks, and if so, it's hard to imagine, but do you expect further attacks soon, or will the enemy wait for things to calm down?

LaRouche: No.

This attack that was done in New York and in Washington, targetted the people of the United States. What did they hit?

They hit New York City. New York City is symbol of the financial power of the United States—that's only a symbol, it's not really the financial power of the world, but it's a symbol of that in people's mind. It's the greatest concentration, outside of London, of the financial center population. They attacked the personnel in the Pentagon, which is the command of the military forces. These were psychological attacks against the U.S. population. It was not an attempt to kill the President—no sign of it. And, as I read the mind of the enemy, the enemy had no intention to kill the President at this time. Maybe later, yes. Though the people who said there was a threat to the life of the President, were right. Anytime something like this happens, the Secret Service, and other agencies, have to assume there's a threat to the President, and act as if they had actual knowledge of a threat, under those conditions, even if there's no actual threat known. The very fact of an attack on New York City in that way, indicates that there's a threat to the President of the United States; you don't do that to the United States, without representing a potential threat, immediately, to the life of the President.

Because what do you want to do with it? Why do you want to attack the United States? Obviously, to defeat it. How can you defeat it with an attack like that? Well, maybe, bring down its government, attack its centers of government. They weren't at that this time. This time, they were trying to panic the American people.

Now that means that they're not ready to make the coup d'etat yet. That means that they'll be looking for a next operation which would probably, knowing the mind of the animal, will be different than this operation, that just happened. But it will be a larger scale attack on the American population.

Then, if the population is sufficiently malleable, by being terrified by this, then they might go for the actual coup d'etat. But we're looking at a threat of a coup d'etat against the United States government.

Now, therefore, I know how these things can be done. I've been at this counterintelligence for a long time.

So, we're playing a mind game against an animal, in the forest, an animal whose spoor I have read, and whose necessary species I know. I do not know the names of the animals. I don't know where they're located. I can guess. Therefore, we're playing a mind game against the enemy, which is this animal—the coup potential, the rogue element inside our security forces, with whatever allies it has and accomplices it has. Therefore, we have to conduct our policy not merely to find him, and neutralize him, but we also have to take measures which will frustrate his ability to achieve the effects for which he aims.

Therefore, we have to do as I say. First of all, you have to calm the population; you have to say what the enemy's nature is. Stop talking about Arab terrorists; this is not our problem. They're are problems of that type in the world, but this is not our problem here. Name the names—as much as we can. Say what the danger is. Say we're determined to stop it, and say that if the enemy tries to run a coup d'etat, the American people will rise up and destroy him if he tries it.

That's the first thing to be made clear. Because we don't know where he is. We don't know where to hunt him out. We don't have his name, but we know what kind of an animal he is, and we know what his game. Therefore, we maneuver as you in warfare, where you don't see the enemy's eyes. You know his troops are there, and you deal with him accordingly.

Sigerson: Well, let's get this a little bit clearer, though. I mean, there are people in the United States now who are arguing that it's the U.S. government that did it. I've heard arguments going so far as to say, that George Bush did it himself. Now, you're saying that it's rogue elements inside the government.

LaRouche: They're inside the government, probably, but you have Mr. X. See, Mr. X on the one hand is a government official, or a member of some part of the security establishment. Maybe a retired general officer, acting in some other capacity. So, you know him by his right name, his ordinary name. But he has another identity, as a member of this organization.

Also, in these kinds of things, an operation like this has a very tricky command structure. The command structure is designed to be an efficiently centralized command structure, but on a need-to-know basis, so the various elements that are being deployed, really don't know what they're doing. We've seen this before.

Sigerson: But, inside the United States.

LaRouche: Inside the United States. The danger lies inside the United States. An outside attack on us would be dangerous to anyone, any enemy. We don't have much power left, but we have that kind of power. Nobody better attack the United States from the outside. We are vulnerable to an attack delivered by an agency from the inside. And that's something I think frightens some people in government, who may suspect I'm right on this one.

How do you tell the American people they have to look for the danger from the inside? Isn't it convenient to say, we're going to go out and hit somebody, particularly when you have idiots like CNN, and Fox News, clamoring for the United States to go out and run a "clash of civilizations," to turn the planet into a global religious war, in attacking a billion Muslims on this planet—stirring up you know not what else?

They're nuts. And the first thing is to shut these guys. Don't take away their civil rights, but come out and say, "These are clowns, don't listen to them."

If the President of the United States says, "Don't listen to CNN, don't listen to Fox News, they're a bunch of irresponsible clowns lying to you, and just trying to drive you crazy," it probably would a very good thing for him to do.

Sigerson: Okay. What should, then,... you've gone through what Americans shouldn't fear. What should your average American do under these circumstances?

LaRouche: First of all, is face the truth.

He needs some help. I found that what we're doing, what I'm doing and my associates are doing, and others, is working. That people to whom we speak, you know... First thing you do is, how do you speak to American people? Speak in a calm voice, even level, calm—"Relax, friend." "Let's think about this, think about what you're saying, think about what you're being told. Do you really think it's true?"

Get people from panicking, get them to think. We find, it's works. Oh, you'll have a few people who are crazy already, driven crazy by this stuff. But most people will tend to think, if you approach them in the right away.

So, first of all, we have to, I, my associates, and others, have to approach the American people calmly: Say, "Look, it's a terrible threat. We don't deny it." "There's a terrible depression coming down. Don't deny it." But we say, we can lick these things. We can defeat the enemy. We can control this depression. We can survive this quite nicely. We did it under Roosevelt; we've learned lesssons—we can do it again. So we don't need to worry about that. What we need to worry about, is, can we get ourselves together, to get the governement to do what it has to do.

That's what has to be done essentially. If you got the American people mobilized behind you, on the basis of that kind of voice, that kind of determination, you know have an army, the army of the people of the United States. The army will mobilize as an army, to fight the enemy it has. And I think this army will do fairly well.

Sigerson: In 1995, your magazine, Executive Intelligence Review, put out a special report which discussed in great detail, the British intelligence involvement in all sorts of terrorist activities internationally, and domestically. Do you think there's a British involvement in the current operations?

LaRouche: Yes. There are probably two sides in Britain on this one, as there are in this country.

For example, terrorism, modern terrorism, in the present form, was unleashed as a mass phenomenon in Europe, the United States, and elsewhere in 1968. Some of the same people who were leaders, or key participants, in terrorism in 1968, such as, for example, the Basque terrorists in Spain, have been continuously functioning as terrorists to the present day.

Sigerson: That's the ETA.

LaRouche: The ETA. They're part of this operation. They were part of the operation.... Remember we had this planned terrorist deployment in Washington, D.C. for the end of September. This was headed up by an international intelligence figure named Teddy Goldsmith. Teddy Goldsmith is the brother of the deceased Jimmy Goldsmith, who's a key part of Iran-Contra, what we called Iran-Contra, that created the Afghansi operation, which created Osama bin Laden, created him. So this was a British-American-Israeli operation, essentially—this terrorist operation, and it was used for political effects. It was not a bunch of independent terrorists running around organizing terrorists organizations. These things were organized from the top, by the so-called secret, or special warfare, branches of govenrment, or similar kinds of government agencies, and powerful agencies, financial and so forth.

So, part of this was British intelligence; you had an element in the United States. Take the United States in the past 25 years.

The terrorism which created the Afghansis was first launched on behalf of the United States by Zbigniew Brzezinski, the man who designated Jimmy Carter to be nominated as President of the United States, and who became his national security adviser. It was under Brzezinski that the Afghansi was created, as an Afghan operation against the Soviet system. It was sort of like a Vietnam operation against the Soviet system.

So, this kind of terrorism is that. That has continued to the present day.

In the 1980s, in the name of counter-terrorism, operating out of one branch of the National Security Council, you had what became known as Iran-Contra. This was another level.

Now, you had the 1970s terrorism, which was organized out of govenrment agencies. In Italy, in France, and so forth. You had the 1980s terrorism, which was organized by the same forces. British and the British, Israeli, and U.S. forces were key in this stuff. Certain elements of NATO—funny, funny departments of NATO—were involved.

Today, this crowd, that is now training and directing the operational aspects of the terrorism planned for Washington, D.C. for the end of this month, this crowd is trained by people who were part of the generation of '68 terrorists, part of the generation of the 1970s terrorists, part of the generation of the 1980s terrorists. So you have a terrorist capability loose on this planet. And this is known, it can be identified, it can be dealt with, it can be exposed, and if you expose adequately, you can neutralize it.

Sigerson: So, you're saying that the enemy that committed this act, one week ago, although U.S.-based, or based partially in the U.S., could be using these elements, like bin Laden, and so forth.

LaRouche: I think bin Laden is not too important. I don't think he's particularly significant for this particular operation. But the same people who, as a command group, were operating in things like the terrorism of the 1960s, '70s, '80s, who were involved in Iran-Contra—which was actually a terrorist operation, if you want to know, an irregular warfare operation. The same people are loose, and it is in that command structure, that somebody could pull together a group of people who have access to all kinds of resources, and know how to do these things.

Because the mind that runs this kind of special warfare operation is a special kind of military mind. So you're looking for top-grade military-strategic specialists, who know how to set up and operation as skillful and technologically-polished as this attack on New York and Washington was. No amateur is going to this; no rough-and-tumble terrorist can do that. They can do certain things; they're part of the auxiliaries of the operation. But they're not the people who can set up the kind of operation we're presented with.

And we have this element—the command element is still here. Nobody's exposed it. It's not been caught. It's ready to strike again. And with the behavior of CNN and so forth, it's being given all the encouragement it needs to strike at its choosing.

The only defense we have now, is an increasing awareness, in some part of the political command-structure and elsewhere; possibly including key people in the White House; who, while not saying much about it publicly, are aware that this kind of problem exists. And therefore, they are probably beginning to act.

The only thing that will prevent the enemy from acting, is our taking some kind of preemptive action of that type. If you expose the problem—a terrorist problem, a cover-up problem—you largely weaken it, if not destroy it.

Sigerson: Do you think that this has anything to do with the Oklahoma bombing?

LaRouche: Well, it's the same kind of operation. The Oklahoma bombing obviously required a capability which Timothy McVeigh did not have, nor his associate. Somebody decided to put the lid on it. He was willing to have himself killed as a martyr for the cause.

Now, what about these guys who flew planes into the Pentagon, or into the two buildings in New York City? They're willing to be martyrs for a cause. They have such pleasure in killing themselves, they could do that with precision. Timothy McVeigh advertised himself as a man who was willing to do what was done at Oklahoma City with precision—well, not precision; he didn't have the capability. But you have organizations like that—and obviously McVeigh came from an organization like that—which is why I protested so loudly against the way in which he was railroaded into a quick conviction. What we needed was counterintelligence, against whatever was really behind what he did.

The problem was, from my standpoint, that when this happened at Oklahoma City, very soon higher authorities stepped in, and put the lid on other leads that might have led to others—"We got the man! Try him! Hang him! Get rid of him! Cover it up!" Like a cat covering up what it just did.

Sigerson: What do you think foreign governments could do, right now, in order to help the United States? I know there are a lot of foreign governments that are very, very wary of what they think the United States is about to do, with the Middle East adventure. They're terrified, in fact.

LaRouche: They're afraid that they think the United States is proposing to do things that are crazy, for the United States and for everyone concerned. That is, launching a so-called revenge attack. Revenge is the worst idea in military science. You never practice revenge in military practice—never! You win wars—war means a peaceful, successful conclusion to a conflict. And your objective is to achieve that, with the least expenditure of time and effort possible, especially life.

You never go to war for revenge. We had that in the European experience, in the period from 1511-1648; which is the period in which Europe was dominated, and almost destroyed by religious war...

Sigerson: That was the Thirty Years War.

LaRouche: ...but also: from 1511. All the wars of the 16th Century. Most of the major wars, wars of the Netherlands; all the other wars, were largely religious wars. In these religious wars, the character of the warfare was revenge. In the Crusades, there was an element of the same thing. The character of the warfare was religious warfare—revenge.

There are other things in history of the same kind. You never fight war for revenge! You never chase a defeated enemy and try to make war on him. You try to induce him to surrender, or to come to an agreement which ends the causes of the war. And if you have a peace agreement, you honor it! You don't look for victims; you don't look for revenge.

Revenge is a motive which leads to new dark ages of civilization. People who pose it, don't know what they're doing, and should be kept out of political and military command! Fire them! Don't keep them in there! They're a menace to peace and civilization.

So that's one concern, but there's another aspect to this. The governments of the world are afraid, not of terrible things that the United States might do—that's not the fear. The fear, as expressed in France and in Germany in the past week, for example, is the fear that—and they use this language—that this kind of attack will cause a clash of civilizations.

Now, "clash of civilizations" is the language of Zbigniew Brzezinski. Now, Brzezinski represents the kind of mentality—I'm not saying that Brzezinski is behind the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington—but Brzezinski represents the state of mind of the kind of person who would want to do that. He might not intend to do that. But his state of mind would lead at least other people to do that.

Sigerson: As an attack against the former Soviet Union?

LaRouche: No, the purpose is very simple. The possibility now—and it's coming, rapidly—that the Eurasian continent, and its adjoining islands, has been moving into a step-by-step cooperation, economic cooperations for rejuvenation of that continent from the conditions of ongoing financial and monetary collapse. This would mean that the continent would tend to be united as an economic force, for economic purposes.

Western Europe, for example, which is bankrupt, would now have a market opened in China, India and elsewhere, for export of high technology. You would have long-term agreements, large-scale infrastructure projects which would create vast new employment opportunities, and new wealth in Eurasia. This would make Eurasia a power.

Now, there are certain people, in the United States and Britain, who see themselves as the English-speaking, maritime power that rules the world. And they see any such development, involving Japan, Russia, China, India, Southeast Asia, Western Europe—that kind of cooperation—they see as a threat, in the long term, to their continued ability to rule this planet, as a maritime, financier power.

Therefore, there're some people, like Brzezinski, and Kissinger, who say, "Break it up." How do you break it up? Well, you start wars. We've had two world wars, over this issue, in the last century. The British organized World War I, and they're solely responsible for it. Other people were idiots, but the British monarchy, specifically organized it, as a geopolitical war, to prevent France, Germany, Russia, Japan, China, from cooperating around ideas such as the Trans-Siberian Railroad, or the Berlin-Baghdad Railroad. To break that up, the British ran an operation to put France and Russia, against Germany, Austro-Hungary, and so forth. We finally got in—in the war. But, that was a geopolitical war.

World War II was started as a geopolitical war: Some British interests, and some financial interests in New York City—Averell Harriman and company—put Hitler into power in January of 1933, with the intent, that Hitler would move Germany for an attack on the Soviet Union, and then France and Britain would attack the rear of Germany, while Germany was deeply involved in conquering the Soviet Union. That was their plan. It wasn't going to work. So, therefore, the British got the United States to get into the war. We got in happily, because we wanted to defeat Hitler.

But, that's how that war had happened. We're now headed for the potential third geopolitical war in a hundred years. And, Brzezinski wants to start it, to prevent the nations of Central Asia, as being a fulcrum point for bringing East Asia and Western Europe into continguity.

My view, of course, is that, it's in our interest, that Eurasia should unite in that way, for an economic recovery, in Asia, in which we would hope that the United States would participate; and, find that as a market, for what we should go back to producing, and exporting into this part of the world. But, some people, in the United States and Britain, think differently.

Now, the key weapon these guys have: They say, could they induce Israel to start a religious war in the Middle East? Israel could not win a war in the Middle East, now. They have the conventional ability to win a war; but they could not occupy and hold the territory. They would be destroyed by the attempt to occupy and hold adverse territory. So, they would be forced to go to so-called weapons of mass destruction. That would be sufficient to throw the whole continent into flames. Some people say, we don't want the Israelis to do that. Other people say, the United States has to do that. We have to do that. We have to keep the Israelis out, the way it was done with Desert Storm. Keep the Israelis out; we'll do the job, on Iraq. And, the same thing is coming back now.

So, there are people who have a mentality which tends to push them into schemes of this type. You have a war-game that was run in July of 2000, in New York, at CFR.

Sigerson: Council on Foreign Relations—

LaRouche: Yeah. Which ran this simulation: What do you do when an economic crisis—along these kinds of lines.

So, we have people, typified by Brzezinski—people like that—who, in the establishment, are talking and thinking in these terms. So, therefore, why assume that there are not other people in the establishment, maybe with general or flag officer rank, or retired, and others, who think the same thing, share the same thoughts, and say, "Well, we're men of action. We're going to do something about it." How do we get the United States to go that way? Well, you terrify the United States; you overthrow the government; you establish the equivalent of a military dictatorship. And we go gung-ho! Right?

And, that's the kind of danger.

So, therefore, what happens in Russia—which is key in this thing: The key nation for cooperation, with the United States, is Russia. Russia is on bad times; so are we! It does not have the degree of military power it had ten years, twelve years ago. But, it is a great power, still. It has the command structure at the top, including military intelligence and other elements of command structure, which are that of a great power. And, it's the greatest power on this planet, after the United States, in terms of this capability.

Russia wishes to recover. It has a President, Putin, who, around him, is oriented toward recovery and a Eurasian cooperation. Who has sought and is willing to cooperate with the United States. If we and Russia—if the President of the United States and the President of Russia—agree on this problem, and say we're going to outflank it, under those circumstances, the nations of Western Europe will rejoice, and will cooperate. And much of the rest of the world will cooperate. And, then, we can, as a global force of allied nations, or nations which are acting as partners—we could bring this problem under control. That's the possibility.

So, therefore, yes: They are concerned. What they're afraid of, is that, if we don't get the kind of cooperation, between the United States and Eurasia; between the United States and Russia, and with Western Europe, China, India, and so forth—Japan, and so forth—unless we get that kind of cooperation, this world is headed for Hell.

So, therefore, the immediate, obvious danger, is: The United States will do something foolish, in military adventures, in so-called reprisal warfare. The more general danger is, that we don't cooperate, for a much higher purpose, of bringing this world into order, where this kind of threat no longer arises.

Sigerson: To change the topic a little bit. On the question of the financial situation: Yesterday, the stock market opened. It went down quite a bit. I think, today, the airlines went to the White House, hat in hand, asking for a huge amount of government aid—direct aid—to help bail them out. The government seems disposed to giving large quantities of money, for, obviously, the reconstruction of New York—the World Trade Center; but, seems to also want to give a lot of money elsewhere. Is this the right direction to go? Or, what would be the effect if they just continued to print money this way?

LaRouche: A bailout is absolutely wrong. You have two tendencies, in the United States, on this issue. There's a general understanding, we have to deal with this financial collapse. Wall Street is about to go under. No question about it. Greenspan, and similar, like-minded idiots, are hitting the panic button. "Bail out! Bail out! Bail out! At any price! Bail out for tomorrow! Bail out for tomorrow! Bail out for tomorrow! We don't care about next week: Bail out tomorrow—!" They're crazy. They're men of desperation.

There are other people in the woodwork, who are key bankers, political influentials, who disagree strongly with Greenspan, and say, we've got to do other things—of the kind that I've been proposing.

Now, the government should not pour out money, to bail out bankrupt corporations. You don't do that in a private bankruptcy, do you? You have a firm. You want to save the firm. The firm's accounts show that it is technically, financially, bankrupt. What do you do? You put the firm under bankruptcy protection. You want it to continue to function. You freeze certain things. You come in and give it protection, against foreclosure. You come in—. Now you get a line of credit organized, organized by the government; not money, but a line of government credit—like store credit. The government creates a line of credit, which is a guarantee, that this company will be able to function,—or this group of companies, this industry, will be able to function in its normal fashion, over the next ten, twenty years. It's undergoing reorganization, will find a way of dealing with this pile of unpaid bills, which it can't handle, at present.

So, you don't want more stock speculation. You don't want to boost the stock, by a big infusion of money. What you want to do, is, you want to walk in and say, "Okay, boys. We'll give you bankruptcy protection, as an industry. An emergency has been created; an emergency, which has been created by the world financial crisis; an emergency which has been aggravated, by what has happened here, with this incident in New York and Washington, which was terrible. Therefore, under the conditions of emergency, we will give you production. The power of government, will protect you. You will also be given—we'll go to the Congress. We'll get you a long-term line of credit. What you need? Ten? Twenty years, to rebuild? You'll get it! Not as cash. Not as payment to your stockholders: But insurance that you continue to do that job, that you're doing. That you will function. That you will maintain your equipment. You'll maintain your flights."

Just the same way used to protect the railroads. It's a national asset. It's an essential part of our national infrastructure. We need it! Therefore, we're not going to sit back, and watch it go down the drain. It's ours. It may be private companies, but the benefit these private companies are giving us, is ours. Therefore, we protect our interest in what they're doing, and keep them functioning.

We have a number of cases like that. We have a situation like that in much of the energy industry—and utility area. Same thing. We're going to have other sections of the economy, that are going to go under—the same thing. What we have to do, is reorganize the finances. Put the shebang under bankruptcy reorganization. Organize lines of credit—not pour money out—to get people back to work.

And, what we have to do, above all, is, put the U.S. economy back among breakeven. Look, for the past years, the United States has been running a massive current account deficit. That is, we have been earning less, than we have been spending, in buying from the world. Therefore, for a great number of years, this means that we have been operating as bankrupts. Been operating at a loss. We no longer have the ability to generate the wealth to pay our own bills. We have been borrowing money from the world—from yen, and other parts of the world, flooding in as financial capital; we've been printing paper money, at a hyperinflationary rate, as a way of keeping it going. We can't go on like this!

The solution is: We can reorganize everything. But, how are you going to have a viable company, or a viable national economy, when you get through with all the reorganizing? You have to have a growth factor. It means you have to put people to work, producing wealth. We have a vast infrastructure gap in this country, and in the world. We must do two things: We must have an export drive, in cooperation with Eurasia, especially, in which we are now going to commit ourselves to produce products that the world needs for the development of its infrastructure: rail systems, and other kinds of things they need; technology needed for local communities, around the world. We're going to produce that, on long-term arrangements. We're, at the same time, going to increase our internal, domestic employment, by cranking up some of the infrastructure development, we desperately need, such as the utility industry. So, we will crank it up.

So, we will now bring the economy above a loss ratio, which—we're now operating at a loss! as the current account deficit teaches us. We must now go to the profit side, where we are actually producing more and earning more, than we're spending! Now, the way to do that, is not to cut the number of people who eat! The way to do it, is to put a number of the people who are unemployed or inadequately employed, into producing things we need.

So, that's what government has to do.

Sigerson: Well—that's good! Do you have any final comments?

LaRouche: No, I think, just what I said, at the beginning. We're in a terrible crisis, the worst crisis we've faced, probably since the Civil War in our country. And, since a long time in the history of European civilization. It's a terrible crisis. It's awful. We saw what happened in New York; what happened in Washington: It's awful. It could become much worse.

Some of us, think about what our lives mean for the future of humanity. And, we act, not because of what benefit we calculate for ourselves, personally, in the here and now. We estimate what we should do and what we do for future generations of humanity. When people used to have children, and maintain families, and didn't get divorces every time they didn't like the dinner, that one or the other cooked—you had long-term perspectives on the basis of children and grandchildren. People would locate their connection to the future, in terms of the family. That has not become so fashionable, nowadays. Usually, the children are taught in school to hate their parents, and so forth: It's not a very good situation.

But, there are some of us around, who still think that way: That the importance of our lives, lies not in what we get, but it lies in what we give, to the future of humanity. People who think like that, as I do, are leaders. They're not only leaders, because they're qualified to be leaders—because that does qualify them to be leaders—but, they're just committed to be leaders. It's like a profession. It's like being a doctor. It's like being a teacher. You don't do it, because you want to get money; some do, of course. But, you do it, because, you think, that's what you, as a person, should do, with your life. The teacher looks at the children, and says, "What's going to become of these children, as a result of my being a teacher?" The physician thinks, "What's going to happen to my community, as a result of my being a physician?" They have a sense of identity, which reaches beyond their mortal life. They're leaders, on all levels.

We, who are leaders, or who have the capacity to think as leaders, must take the crisis of our time, think as leaders, and try to impart our sense of building the future, to the rest of our citizens. And, say to them, that, no matter what happens, to any of us, we guarantee, that your life, will not be wasted. That, whatever good you do, the rest of us are dedicated to perpetuate, for the benefit of the future of humanity. And, you can smile, because your future, in that sense, is assured—your sense of identity.

Sigerson: Thank you very much, Mr. LaRouche.

 

I am a happy produtive AMERICAN who loves his goverment. They are our friends and they are here to help us. I know this to be true because They told me so. I think all this info reported here is a "misunderstanding" we can work out if we try. Pehaps if we sat down together and had tea or coffee and discussed these "facts". I'll bring the powdered donuts.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally squeeked by Stu Padasso:
I am a happy produtive AMERICAN who loves his goverment. They are our friends and they are here to help us. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

hmm. right. well look at the legislation that the senate and house has passed for it's american people...

i was led to believe by senator edwards (at the formal democrat state dinner i went to over the weekend where he was the keynote speaker) that he was for unity but not so much that it takes away basic civil liberties of the american people.

I recently discovered that legislation was passed in the senate on thursday i beleive (ie before the dinner) by a 96-1 vote. He voted for the USA Act of 2001. here is info on what that act does: (side note, the house passed a similar act friday and therefore all that needs to be done is a committee meeting between the house and senate to smooth out differences before its shipped to georgie with his stamp of approval), anyway here is what it's all about.

The most troubling provisions in both the Senate and the modified House anti-terrorism legislation now include: Permits Information Sharing: Allows information obtained during criminal investigations to be distributed to the CIA, NSA, INS, Secret Service and military, without judicial review, and with no limits as to how these agencies can use the information once they have it. Authorizes "Sneak and Peek Searches": Authorizes expanded use of covert searches for any criminal investigation, thus allowing the government to enter your home, office or other private place and conduct a search, take photographs, and download your computer files without notifying you until later. Allows Forum Shopping: Law enforcement can apply for warrants in any court in any jurisdiction where it is conducting an investigation for a search anywhere in the country. This would make it very difficult for individuals subjected to searches to challenge the warrant. Creates New Crime of Domestic Terrorism: Creates an entirely new type of crime, which is unnecessary for the prosecution of the "War on Terrorism." By expanding the definition of terrorism in such a way, the bill could potentially allow the government to levy heavy penalties for relatively minor offenses, including political protests. Allows the CIA to Spy on Americans: Gives the Director of Central Intelligence the power to manage the gathering of intelligence in America and mandate the disclosure of information obtained by the FBI about terrorism in general - even if it is about law-abiding American citizens - to the CIA. Imposes Indefinite Detention: Permits authorities to indefinitely detain non-citizens, without meaningful judicial review. Reduces Privacy in Student Records: Allows law enforcement to access, use and disseminate highly personal information about American and foreign students. Expands Wiretap Authority: Minimizes judicial supervision of law enforcement wiretap authority in several ways, including: permitting law enforcement to obtain the equivalent of "blank" warrants in the physical world; authorizing intelligence wiretaps that need not specify the phone to be tapped or require that only the target's conversations be eavesdropped upon; and allowing the FBI to use its "intelligence" authority to circumvent the judicial review of the probable cause requirement of the Fourth Amendment.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stu Padasso:
I am a happy produtive AMERICAN who loves his goverment. They are our friends and they are here to help us. I know this to be true because They told me so. I think all this info reported here is a "misunderstanding" we can work out if we try. Pehaps if we sat down together and had tea or coffee and discussed these "facts". I'll bring the powdered donuts. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Shutthefuckup,methinks you fucking bleeding heart liberal-Stu is quite right!I sometimes get so angry with myself for breaking from the flock-it's people like me that cause all the problems in the world..."why don't i just shut the fuck up!?!!"

 

Jesus!I just can't help myself!

THE SO-CALLED EVIDENCE IS A FARCE: FORMER GREEN BERET SAYS BUSH IS LYING

Stan Goff: The So-Called Evidence Is a Farce

I'm a retired Special Forces Master Sergeant. That doesn't cut much for those who will only accept the opinions of former officers on military matters, since we enlisted swine are assumed to be incapable of grasping the nuances of doctrine.

But I wasn't just in the army. I studied and taught military science and doctrine. I was a tactics instructor at the Jungle Operations Training Center in Panama, and I taught Military Science at West Point. And contrary to the popular image of what Special Forces does, SF's mission is to teach. We offer advice and assistance to foreign forces. That's everything from teaching marksmanship to a private to instructing a Battalion staff on how to coordinate effective air operations with a sister service.

Based on that experience, and operations in eight designated conflict areas from Vietnam to Haiti, I have to say that the story we hear on the news and read in the newspapers is simply not believable. The most cursory glance at the verifiable facts, before, during, and after September 11th, does not support the official line or conform to the current actions of the United States government.

But the official line only works if they can get everyone to accept its underlying premises. I'm not at all surprised about the Republican and Democratic Parties repeating these premises. They are simply two factions within a single dominant political class, and both are financed by the same economic powerhouses. My biggest disappointment, as someone who identifies himself with the left, has been the tacit acceptance of those premises by others on the left, sometimes naively, and sometimes to score some morality points. Those premises are twofold. One, there is the premise that what this de facto administration is doing now is a "response" to September 11th. Two, there is the premise that this attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was done by people based in Afghanistan. In my opinion, neither of these is sound.

To put this in perspective we have to go back not to September 11th, but to last year or further.

A man of limited intelligence, George W. Bush, with nothing more than his name and the behind-the-scenes pressure of his powerful father-a former President, ex-director of Central Intelligence, and an oil man-is systematically constructed as a candidate, at tremendous cost. Across the country, subtle and not-so-subtle mechanisms are put into place to disfranchise a significant fraction of the Democrat's African-American voter base. This doesn't come out until Florida becomes a battleground for Electoral College votes, and the magnitude of the story has been suppressed by the corporate media to this day. In a decision so lacking in legitimacy, the Supreme Court will neither by-line the author of the decision nor allow the decision to ever be used as a precedent, Bush v. Gore awards the presidency of the United States to a man who loses the popular vote in Florida and loses the national popular vote by over 600,000.

This de facto regime then organizes a very interesting cabinet. The Vice President is an oil executive and the former Secretary of Defense. The National Security Advisor is a director on the board of a transnational oil corporation and a Russia scholar. The Secretary of State is a man with no diplomatic experience whatsoever, and the former Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The other interesting appointment is Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense. Rumsfeld is the former CEO of Searle Pharmaceuticals. He and Cheney were featured as speakers at the May, 2000, Russian-American Business Leaders Forum. So the consistent currents in this cabinet are petroleum, the former Soviet Union, and the military.

Based on the record of Daddy Bush, in all his guises, and the general trajectory of US foreign policy as far back as the Carter Administration, I feel I can reasonably conclude that Middle Eastern and South Asian fossil fuels are one of their major preoccupations. Not just because this klavern has some very direct financial interests in fossil fuel, but because they surely know that worldwide oil production is peaking as we speak, and will soon begin a permanent and precipitous decline that will completely change the character of civilization as we know it within 20 years.

Even the left seems to be in deep denial about this, but the math is available. And, no, alternative energies and energy technologies will not save us. All the alternatives in the world can not begin to provide more than a tiny fraction of the energy base now provided by oil. This makes it more than a resource, and the drive to control what's left more than an economic competition.

I further conclude that the economic colonization of the former Soviet Union is probably high on that agenda, and in fact has a powerful synergy with the issue of petroleum. Russia not only holds vast untapped resources that beckon to imperialism in crisis, it remains a credible military and nuclear challenger in the region.

We have not one, but three members of the Bush de facto cabinet with military credentials, which makes the cabinet look quite a lot like a military General Staff. All this way before September 11th.

Then there's the subject of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. NATO might have expected consignment to the dustbin of the Cold War after the Eastern Bloc shattered in 1991. Peace dividend and all that. But it didn't. It expanded directly into the former states of the Eastern Bloc toward the former Soviet Union, and contributed significant forces to the devastation of Iraq-a key country in the world oil market, over which control translates into the ability to manipulate oil prices.

NATO is a military formation, and the United States exerts the controlling interest in it. It seemed like a form without a function, but it remedied that pretty quickly.

Then when Yugoslavia refused to play ball with the International Monetary Fund, the US and Germany began a systematic campaign of destabilization there, even using some of the veterans of Afghanistan in that campaign.
NATO became the military arm of that agenda-the break-up of Yugoslavia into compliant statelets, the further containment of the former Soviet Union, and the future pipeline easement for Caspain Sea oil to Western European markets through Kosovo.

You see, this is important to understand, and people-even those against the war talk-are tending to overlook the significance of it. NATO is not a guarantor of international law, and it is not a humanitarian organization.

It is a military alliance with one very dominant partner. And it can no longer claim to be a defensive alliance against European socialists. It is an instrument of military aggression.

NATO is the organization that is now going to thrust further along the 40th parallel from the Balkans through the Southern Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union. The US military has already taken control of a base in Uzbekistan. No one is talking about how what we are doing seems to be a very logical extension of a strategy that was already in motion, and has been in motion for two decades. Once we recognize the pattern of activity designed to simultaneously consolidate control over Middle Eastern and South Asian oil, and contain and colonize the former Soviet Union, Afghanistan is exactly where they need to go to pursue that agenda.

Afghanistan borders Iran, India, and even China but, more importantly, the Central Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. These border Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan borders Russia. Turkmenistan sits on the Southeastern quadrant of the Caspian Sea, whose oil the Bush Administration dearly covets.

Afghanistan is necessary for two things: as a base of operations to begin the process of destabilizing, breaking off, and establishing control over the South Asian Republics, which will begin within the next 18-24 months in my opinion, and constructing a pipeline through Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan to deliver petroleum to the Asian market.

The BBC was recently told by Niaz Naik, a Pakistani Foreign Secretary, that senior American officials were warning them as early as mid-July that military action for mid-October was being planned for Afghanistan. In 1996, the Department of Energy was issuing reports on the desirability of a pipeline through Afghanistan, and in 1998, Unocal testified before the House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific that this pipeline was crucial to transport Caspian Basin oil to the Indian Ocean.

Given this evidence that a military operation to secure at least a portion of Afghanistan has been on the table, possibly as early as five years ago, I can't help but conclude that the actions we are seeing put into motion now are part of a pre-September 11th agenda. I'm absolutely sure of that, in fact. The planning alone for operations, of this scale, that are now taking shape, would take many months. And we are seeing them take shape in mere weeks.

It defies common sense. This administration is lying about this whole thing being a "reaction" to September 11th. That leads me, in short order, to be very suspicious of their yet-to-be-provided evidence that someone in Afghanistan is responsible. It's just too damn convenient. Which also leads me to wonder-just for the sake of knowing-what actually did happen on September 11th, and who actually is responsible.

The so-called evidence is a farce. The US presented Tony Blair's puppet government with the evidence, and of the 70 so-called points of evidence, only nine even referred to the attacks on the World Trade Center, and those points were conjectural. This is a bullshit story from beginning to end. Presented with the available facts, any 16-year old with a liking for courtroom dramas could tear this story apart like a two-dollar shirt. But our corporate press regurgitates it uncritically. But then, as we should know by now, their role is to legitimize.

This cartoon heavy they've turned bin Laden into makes no sense, when you begin to appreciate the complexity and synchronicity of the attacks. As a former military person who's been involved in the development of countless operations orders over the years, I can tell you that this was a very sophisticated and costly enterprise that would have left what we call a huge "signature".

In other words, it would be very hard to effectively conceal.

So there's a real question about why there was no warning of this. That can be a question about the efficacy of the government's intelligence apparatus. That can be a question about various policies in the various agencies that had to be duped to orchestrate this action. And it can also be a question about whether or not there was foreknowledge of the event, and that foreknowledge is being covered up. To dismiss this concern out of hand as the rantings of conspiracy nuts is premature. And there is a history of this kind of thing being done by national political bosses, including the darling of liberals, Franklin Roosevelt. The evidence is very compelling that the Roosevelt Administration deliberately failed to act to stop Pearl Harbor in order to mobilize enough national anger to enter the World War II.

I have no idea why people aren't asking some very specific questions about the actions of Bush and company on the day of the attacks.

Follow along:
Four planes get hijacked and deviate from their flight plans, all the while on FAA radar. The planes are all hijacked between 7:45 and 8:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time.

Who is notified?
This is an event already that is unprecedented. But the President is not notified and going to a Florida elementary school to hear children read.

By around 8:15 AM, it should be very apparent that something is terribly wrong. The President is glad-handing teachers.

By 8:45, when American Airlines Flight 11 crashes into the World Trade Center, Bush is settling in with children for his photo ops at Booker Elementary. Four planes have obviously been hijacked simultaneously, an event never before seen in history, and one has just dived into the worlds best know twin towers, and still no one notifies the nominal Commander in Chief.

No one has apparently scrambled any Air Force interceptors either.

At 9:03, United Flight 175 crashes into the remaining World Trade Center building. At

9:05, Andrew Card, the Presidential Chief of Staff whispers to George W. Bush. Bush "briefly turns somber" according to reporters.
Does he cancel the school visit and convene an emergency meeting? No.
He resumes listening to second graders read about a little girl's pet fucking goat, and continues this banality even as American Airlines Flight 77 conducts an unscheduled point turn over Ohio and heads in the direction of Washington DC.
Has he instructed Chief of Staff Card to scramble the Air Force? No.

An excruciating 25 minutes later, he finally deigns to give a public statement telling the United States what they already have figured out; that there's been an attack by hijacked planes on the World Trade Center.
There's a hijacked plane bee-lining to Washington, but has the Air Force been scrambled to defend anything yet? No.

At 9:30, when he makes his announcement, American Flight 77 is still ten minutes from its target, the Pentagon.

The Administration will later claim they had no way of knowing that the Pentagon might be a target, and that they thought Flight 77 was headed to the White House, but the fact is that the plane has already flown South and past the White House no-fly zone, and is in fact tearing through the sky at over 400 nauts.

At 9:35, this plane conducts another turn, 360 degrees over the Pentagon, all the while being tracked by radar, and the Pentagon is not evacuated, and there are still no fast-movers from the Air Force in the sky over Alexandria and DC.

Now, the real kicker: A pilot they want us to believe was trained at a Florida puddle-jumper school for Piper Cubs and Cessnas, conducts a well-controlled downward spiral, descending the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes, brings the plane in so low and flat that it clips the electrical wires across the street from the Pentagon, and flies it with pinpoint accuracy into the side of this building at 460 nauts.

When the theory about learning to fly this well at the puddle-jumper school began to lose ground, it was added that they received further training on a flight simulator.
This is like saying you prepared your teenager for her first drive on I-40 at rush hour by buying her a video driving game. It's horse shit!

There is a story being constructed about these events. My crystal ball is not working today, so I can't say why.

But at the least, this so-called Commander-in-Chief and his staff that we are all supposed to follow blindly into some ill-defined war on terrorism is criminally negligent or unspeakably stupid. And at the worst, if more is known or was known, and there is an effort to conceal the facts, there is a criminal conspiracy going on.

Certainly, the Bush de facto administration was facing a confluence of crises from which they were temporarily rescued by this event. Whether they played a sinister role or not, there is little doubt that they have at the very least opportunistically pounced on this attack to overcome their lack of legitimacy, to shift the blame for the encroaching recession from capitalism to the September 11th terror attack, to legitimize their pre-existing foreign policy agenda, and to establish and consolidate repressive measures domestically and silence dissent.

In many ways, September 11th pulled the Bush cookies out of the fire.

And given them the green light to begin constructing a long-term scenario within which to establish fascistic control measures at home and abroad as a citadel for the ruling class in the catastrophic conjuncture that we are entering based on the end of oil.

This elephant in the living room is being studiously ignored. In fact, the domestic repression has already begun, officially and unofficially. It's kind of a latter day McCarthyism. I participated in a teach-in at Chapel Hill, North Carolina, on the 17th of September, and though not a single person on the panel excused or justified the attacks, and every person there offered either condolences and prayers for the victims, we were excoriated within two days as "enemies of America." Yesterday an op-ed called for my deportation (to where, one can only guess). Now Herr Ashcroft is fast tracking the biggest abrogation of US civil liberties since the so-called anti-terrorism legislation after the Oklahoma City bombing - which by the way hasn't resulted in anti-terrorism but in the acceleration of the application of the racist death penalty. The FBI has defined terrorist groups not by whether any given group has ever acted as terrorists, but by their beliefs. Some socialists and anti-globalization groups have already been identified by name as terrorist groups, even though there is not a single shred of evidence that they have ever participated in any criminal activity. It reminds me of the Smith Act that was finally declared unconstitutional, but only after a hell of a lot of people served a hell of a long time in jail for the crime of thinking.

I think this also points to yet another huge problems that the Bush regime was facing. Worldwide resistance to the whole so-called neoliberal agenda, which is a prettied up term for debt-leverage imperialism. While debt and the threat of sanctions has been used to coerce nations in the periphery, we have to understand that the final guarantor of compliance remains military action. For a global economic agenda, there is always a corresponding political and military agenda.

The focal point of these actions in the short term is Southern Asia, but they have already scripted this as a worldwide and protracted fight against terrorism.

It's far better than drug wars as a rationalization, and the drug war thing was being discredited in any case. Leftists are regaining power and popularity in Venezuela, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Brazil, and Argentina. Cuba has gained immense prestige over the last few years. The empire is beginning to unravel. We can hardly justify intervention in these places by saying they are not towing the economic line by allowing the absolute domination of their societies by transnational corporations. That exposes the agenda. So we simply claim they are supporting terrorism.

It's for all these reasons I say the left has missed the boat on this one, by allowing them to get away with rushing past the question of who did what on September 11th.

If the official story is a lie, and I think the circumstantial case is strong enough to stay with this question, then we really do need to know what happened. And we need to understand concretely what the motives of this administration are.

And we need to understand more than just their immediate motives, but where the larger social forces that underwrite our situation right now are headed. I do not think this administration is engaged in the deliberative process of a political grouping that is on top of their game. They are putting together some very deliberative technical solutions in response to a larger situation that it slipping rapidly out of their control. Like clear cutting. There's a very smart technology being employed to do a very dumb thing.

What they are responding to is not September 11th, but the beginning of a permanent and precipitous decline in worldwide oil production, the beginning of a deep and protracted worldwide recession, and the unraveling of the empire.

This brings me to a point about what all this means for Americans' security, which they are perfectly justified to worry about.

The actions being prepared by this administration will not only not enhance our security, it will significantly degrade it. Military action against many groups across the globe, which is what the administration is telling us quite openly they are planning to do, will put a lot of backs against the wall. That can't be very secure.

The concept of war being touted here is a violation of the principles of war on several counts, and will inevitably lead to military catastrophes, if you're inclined to view this from a position of moral and political neutrality.

And the people who are now in possession of half the world's remaining oil reserves are subject to destabilization for which we can't even pretend to predict the consequences-but loss of access to critical energy supplies is certainly within the realm of possibility. Worst of all, we will be destabilizing Pakistan, a nuclear power in an active conflict with its neighbor, and we will be provoking Russia, another nuclear power. The security stakes don't get any higher, and Americans can ill afford to ignore nukes.

And I think that this domestic agenda is a tremendous threat to the security of anyone who is critical of the government or their corporate financiers, and we already know that the real threats are against populations that can easily be scapegoated as the domestic crisis deepens.

There is a very real threat right now of creeping fascism in this country, and that phenomenon requires its domestic enemies. Historically those enemies have included leftists, trade unionists, and racially and nationally oppressed sectors. This whole "state of emergency" mentality is already being used to quiet the public discourses of anti-racism, of feminism, of environmentalism, and of both socialism and anarchism. And while there is token resistance by officials to anti-Muslim xenophobia, the stereotypical images have saturated the media, and the government is already beginning to openly re-instate racial profiling. It is only a short step from there to go after other groups. We have long been prepared by the ideologies of overt and covert racism, and racism as both institution and corresponding psychology in the United States is nearly intractable.

It's for all these reasons that I say emphatically that we can not accept anything from this administration; not their policies nor their bullshit stories. What they are doing is very, very dangerous, and the time to fight back against them, openly, is right now, before they can consolidate their power and their agenda. Once they have done that, our job becomes much more difficult.

The left, if it has the capacity to self-organize out of its oblivion, needs to understand its critical roles here. We have to play the role of credible, hard-working, and non-sectarian partners in a broader peace-movement. We have to study, synthesize, and describe our current historical conjuncture. And we have to prepare leadership for the decisive conflict that will emerge to first defeat fascism then take political power.

Rosa Luxemburg's words are truer than ever right now. We are not faced with a choice between socialism and capitalism, but socialism or barbarism.

And what we can least afford are denial and timidity.

 

Russian MP claims US carried out September 11 attacks

An outspoken Russian MP says he believes America is responsible for the September 11 attacks.

Vladimir Zhirinovsky claims the US carried out the attacks to maintain world domination.

He made the remarks at a Nato parliamentary conference in Ottawa, Canada.

Zhirinovsky, a former Russian presidential candidate, is known for his inflammatory statements.

"The United States is responsible. All the terror has been organised by the United States. Osama (bin Laden) had nothing to do with it," he said.

Speaking through an interpreter, he added: "The United States, in order to consolidate its efforts and to produce a coalition, needed to have some sort of provocation in order to invoke Article 5 of the Nato treaty. It is a new political technology to keep domination in the world."

Zhirinovsky says the war against terrorism is phoney and has been triggered by an unstable US dollar, oil prices and a military industrial complex that "needs an enemy".

"In the 20th century, there were some symbols to fight against, like fascism and communism," he said. "They don't exist any more. Now they have found such a symbol, which is terrorism, which has no borders, which has no time limits."

He believes the Americans could capture bin Laden if they wanted to, reports the Winnipeg Sun.

"They got what they wanted. They consolidated the international community, the Nato alliance. They've got political and financial dividends from the situation," he said.

Story filed: 13:00 Tuesday 9th October 2001

 

You really have got the bit between your teeth, haven't you?

And though I appreciate the possibilities of what Vladimir Zhirinovsky has to say about world domination. How does he suppose we dominate China and the likes?

But I must admit we do seem to be dragging it out a bit over there now... It's pretty obvious their not going to come out with their hands up.

And what's going to happen in Afghanistan when we've finnished blowing shit out of it? Who's going to run/govern the country? Will it alter the way they think/live? Start listening to music and so on... Will Western philosophy ever dominate their minds? Or will it always be a domination through fear? Will Afghanistan remain occupied after? And who's next? I wonder...

'Tune in tomorrow to find out what happens the next exciting episode of... SOAP'.

 

Happy New Year It's 1984 -
Bush's Orwellian Address
By Jacob Levich
10-26-1

Seventeen years later than expected, 1984 has arrived. In his address to Congress Thursday, George Bush effectively declared permanent war -- war without temporal or geographic limits; war without clear goals; war against a vaguely defined and constantly shifting enemy. Today it's Al-Qaida; tomorrow it may be Afghanistan; next year, it could be Iraq or Cuba or Chechnya.

No one who was forced to read 1984 in high school could fail to hear a faint bell tinkling. In George Orwell's dreary classic, the totalitarian state of Oceania is perpetually at war with either Eurasia or Eastasia. Although the enemy changes periodically, the war is permanent; its true purpose is to control dissent and sustain dictatorship by nurturing popular fear and hatred.

The permanent war undergirds every aspect of Big Brother's authoritarian program, excusing censorship, propaganda, secret police, and privation. In other words, it's terribly convenient.

And conveniently terrible. Bush's alarming speech pointed to a shadowy enemy that lurks in more 60 countries, including the US. He announced a policy of using maximum force against any individuals or nations he designates as our enemies, without color of international law, due process, or democratic debate.

He explicitly warned that much of the war will be conducted in secret. He rejected negotiation as a tool of diplomacy. He announced starkly that any country that doesn't knuckle under to US demands will be regarded as an enemy. He heralded the creation of a powerful new cabinet-level police agency called the "Office of Homeland Security." Orwell couldn't have named it better.

By turns folksy ("Ya know what?") and chillingly bellicose ("Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists"), Bush stepped comfortably into the role of Big Brother, who needs to be loved as well as feared. Meanwhile, his administration acted swiftly to realize the governing principles of Oceania:

WAR IS PEACE. A reckless war that will likely bring about a deadly cycle of retaliation is being sold to us as the means to guarantee our safety. Meanwhile, we've been instructed to accept the permanent war as a fact of daily life. As the inevitable slaughter of innocents unfolds overseas, we are to "live our lives and hug our children."

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. "Freedom itself is under attack," Bush said, and he's right. Americans are about to lose many of their most cherished liberties in a frenzy of paranoid legislation. The government proposes to tap our phones, read our email and seize our credit card records without court order. It seeks authority to detain and deport immigrants without cause or trial. It proposes to use foreign agents to spy on American citizens. To save freedom, the warmongers intend to destroy it.

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. America's "new war" against terrorism will be fought with unprecedented secrecy, including heavy press restrictions not seen for years, the Pentagon has advised. Meanwhile, the sorry history of American imperialism -- collaboration with terrorists, bloody proxy wars against civilians, forcible replacement of democratic governments with corrupt dictatorships -- is strictly off-limits to mainstream media. Lest it weaken our resolve, we are not to be allowed to understand the reasons underlying the horrifying crimes of September 11.

The defining speech of Bush's presidency points toward an Orwellian future of endless war, expedient lies, and ubiquitous social control. But unlike 1984's doomed protagonist, we've still got plenty of space to maneuver and plenty of ways to resist.

It's time to speak and to act. It falls on us now to take to the streets, bearing a clear message for the warmongers: We don't love Big Brother. ___

Jacob Levich (jlevich@earthlink.net) is an writer, editor, and activist living in Queens, New York.

 

Fighting for freedom is like fucking for virginity.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Reverend Lomotil:
Fighting for freedom is like fucking for virginity.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Scratch that... make it "Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity..."

It's late...