BBC VIDEO: when intel faked terror attacks in Europe

Operation Gladio was far right partisans recruited to be the nucleus of resistance if the Soviets invaded Western Europe, but evolved into doing false flag terrorist actions pretending to be leftists to put stink on the communists, like assassinating the prime minister of Italy.

The first clip on youtube includes an interview with former CIA director William Colby, but the second to last clip is amazing.

It starts with the infiltration of the Red Brigade, and as soon as they were about to do something intel didn't like, they swooped in, and arrested the leaders, then put this assassination plot in motion.

Click to see Youtube video:

You might recall that the FBI had an informant living with two of the 9/11 hijackers and two of the hijackers were supported by Saudi intelligence agents according to Sen. Bob Graham, who co-chaired the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11.They also had an informant in the 1993 WTC bombing ring. According to the New York Times, that guy started taping his FBI handlers, when they told him to give the bombers real explosives instead of harmless powder. So are our intel services incompetent, or following the same model of setting up patsies to do terrorist attacks?

The concluding segment is chilling. It includes Michael Ledeen, the far right American fixer, who apparently had a role in promoting the forged Niger letter about uranium in the run up to the Iraq War.

The Italian intelligence operative who ran the whole program referred to the true believers, those who thought they were really in a communist underground group as robots, lifeless things he brought to life, and then as adorable cute puppets, and winds up a music box with a little moving figure on top to illustrate.

Click to see Youtube video:

All the segments:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

The Italians could do this well enough to kill their prime minister. Any chance our intel people have figured out their own creative uses for this tactic?

This isn't conspiracy theory stuff, it's how you guarantee public support for policies that aren't in the public interest.

The Brits were caught doing this in Iraq, and Israel has carried out these kind of operations against us in the Lavon Affair, and it was probably the intent of the USS Liberty incident as well.

There was a variation of this proposed to President Kennedy, to bomb American cities, hijack planes, and blame it on the Cubans as a pre-text for war, Operation Northwoods. I wouldn't have believed that one if I hadn't seen the declassified docs on it at the National Security Archive at George Washington University.

If you don't want the war on terror to last the rest of our lives, we need to eventually get this piece in the debate, and force Congress to investigate it, just as the did COINTELPRO, MK-ULTRA, and the like with the Church committee in the 70s.

Al Qaeda back on Bush buddy list for Iran War

After a brief stint on the outs, from the mid-90s to 9/11, Sunni jihadis aka Al Qaeda, has become useful again, just as they and the Afghan Taliban were when we wanted to chase the Soviets out of Afghanistan.

The story comes from Pulitzer Prize winning reporter Sy Hersh, who broke the My Lai story, and has been ahead of the curve and accurate on Bush's war plans for Iran.

THE REDIRECTION
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?
Issue of 2007-03-05
Posted 2007-02-25


EXCERPTS:

Saudi Al Qaeda history

Nasr compared the current situation to the period in which Al Qaeda first emerged. In the nineteen-eighties and the early nineties, the Saudi government offered to subsidize the covert American C.I.A. proxy war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Hundreds of young Saudis were sent into the border areas of Pakistan, where they set up religious schools, training bases, and recruiting facilities. Then, as now, many of the operatives who were paid with Saudi money were Salafis. Among them, of course, were Osama bin Laden and his associates, who founded Al Qaeda, in 1988.

***
Saudia Al Qaeda future

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

One contradictory aspect of the new strategy is that, in Iraq, most of the insurgent violence directed at the American military has come from Sunni forces, and not from Shiites. But, from the Administration’s perspective, the most profound—and unintended—strategic consequence of the Iraq war is the empowerment of Iran. Its President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has made defiant pronouncements about the destruction of Israel and his country’s right to pursue its nuclear program, and last week its supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said on state television that “realities in the region show that the arrogant front, headed by the U.S. and its allies, will be the principal loser in the region.”

FULL TEXT:

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/070305fa...

He also mentions Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia as our liaison to these forces.

Bandar has admitted Saudi support for Al Qaeda and setting up a car bombing for us during our brief military presence in Lebanon in the 80s.
Saudi money to Al Qaeda:
(towards the end, he claims it is to make them go away)
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/etc...
Hersh on Saudi money:
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/011022fa...
help with a car bomb:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/in...

The Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 found that Saudi intelligence had direct links to at least two of the 9/11 hijackers. I have to wonder if these guys were ever on the outs with us, or simply serving as skins instead of shirts for one game before shifting back.
http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2007/02/probe-thi...

This is part of a growing list of undisputed things in the public record that show that our military action in the Middle East has nothing to do with a "War on Terror." Here's a couple of others:

1. Teaching democracy by ignoring public opinion. Every poll taken of Iraqis has shown that they want our troops to leave. This is rarely mentioned in our TV news though it was covered in USA Today and the Washington Post, and some of the polls were done by the Bush appointed Coalition Provisional Authority and the British Ministry of Defense.
   http://whatiraqiswant.blogspot.com
   
   The war in Iraq has also harmed not helped our reputation in the Arab & Muslim world, where they impolitely notice we support dictators when it suits us like the presidents of Pakistan, Egypt, and one of the least democratic and most oppressive countries on earth, Saudi Arabia.
   http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2006/06/world-opi...
   http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2005/10/pew-polls...
   
   Some might also notice our friendship with the dictator in Uzbekistan who boils his political opponents alive.
   
   Unlike Americans, Arabs have no idealistic illusions about spreading democracy or fighting terrorism as motives for our war in Iraq. They figure it is about oil. The Bushies are doing nothing to disabuse them of that idea.
   
   
2. Forcing unfair oil deals on Iraq that they wouldn't accept without a gun to their head. The oil deals and Hydrocarbon Law the oil companies and Bushies are forcing on the Iraqis give the bulk of the profits to our oil companies (who don't have a good track record of sharing with us, do they?). Other oil rich countries with easily accessible oil like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, or Iran would never accept deals like this absent a military occupation.
   
   If we were concerned about reducing terrorism, wouldn't we want oil deals in Iraq that couldn't even be suspected of being exploitive?
   
   The chances of that may have been dashed as soon as Bush cancelled Saddam's oil contracts with Russia, France, and others, gave them to American corporations, then signed an executive order saying those companies couldn't be sued by anyone anywhere over pumping Iraq's oil.

Seymour Hersh al qaeda iran terrorism oil president george w bush osama bin laden iraq war occupation dick cheney iraq lies peak oil political opinion agent provocateur george w bush war on terror taliban afghanistan foreign policy new york times cointelpro northwoods worst president ever failure war criminal nazi smartass comments resistance big oil censored news islamofascism

GRAPHS & VIDEOS: Who exactly is a nuclear threat to us?

With the Bushies trotting out the same nuclear boogey man stories to sell the Iran War that they used in Iraq. The essence of the claim is that if some country gets a couple of dozens nukes or even one, they can blackmail us or even hold the whole world hostage.

We seem to be suffering from collective amnesia of some basic math about nuclear weapons most people, including our enemies, knew during the Cold War.

Here's a quick refresher:

These are the nuclear arsenals of most of the countries in the world.

Damn! They could do us some damage couldn't they?

But it looks a little different when you add us and Russia into the picture:

And if you throw in the extra nukes we and the Russians have in mothballs:

If some country nuked us or gave nukes to a terrorist who nuked us, we have enough nukes to burn that country off the map, and not even miss the warheads we used.

Here's a couple of 60 second videos that put it another way:

It’s worth noting that Israel has some nuclear missile submarines too, so if any of their neighbors nuke them, no matter how successfully, Israel could give them a very bad day.

Every world leader knows that not only do we have enough nukes to destroy the whole world several times over, we are the only country who has ever used them. They know that it would be suicidal to nuke us or give a nuke to terrorists to nuke us. That's why the Soviets never attacked us even when they had roughly as many or slightly more nukes than us.

Someone will say the threat of even one nuke going off here is too great. However, the leaders of countries are like chess players. They got into power by being able to accurately predict how their opponents would react to their actions. That's why there are few any examples in history of numerically, technologically, and economically inferior countries launching attacks on a superior country's home turf.

A nuclear attack on us even if successful in itself, would have zero chance of having positive political or economic results for the country that launched it.

You probably already knew this, but you can send it to your righty friends as Rush, O'Reilly, Hannity, Savage, and the other snake oil salesmen get their knickers in a knot about the threat from Iran.

war profiteering iran iraq war wmd terrorism oil nuclear weapons president george w bush warheads nuclear arsenal nuclear weaponsstrategic access nuclear threat north korea republican nuclear+program mutually assured destruction professor smartass iraq propaganda corporation fascism chamber of commerce george w bush war on terror false flag northwoods smartass comments resistance censored news rebel veneuzuela big oil soviet russia israel islamofascism worst president ever failure war criminal idiot retard

MOTIVATIONAL POSTER: Bush says "What's worse, if gov't knew or didn't?"

I was glad to see that President Bush finally understands how most of us feel about his performance on 9/11.




Actually, he was talking about the Iranian government's knowledge of weapons from Iran filtering into Iraq, but like a lot of things Bush says, it fits his own actions better than whoever he is trying to make us afraid of at the moment.

motivational poster terrorism oil president george w bush osama bin laden real reasons christian leader repentance political humor professor smartass lies peak oil propaganda corporationfascism democracy political opinion agent provocateur george w bush war on terror muslim public opinion opinion public relations foreign policy al qaeda false flag cointelpro northwoods terrorist worst president ever failure war criminal idiot retard closet gay puppet fascist chimp humor comedy funny nazi smartass comments resistance censored news

Why was al Qaeda provocateur shielded by British intel?

There is something weird about al Qaeda. Osama used to work with us in Afghanistan, and al Qaeda worked with us as recently as the Balkan War. Now it turns out that a top al Qaeda figure in Britain was shielded from prosecution in other countries even though he met with and incited the shoe bomber and the Madrid bombers, supposedly because he was an informant.

The other possibility is he was an agent provocateur. We have used these extensively with domestic groups like neo-Nazis, the Klan, and most recently the militias during the Clinton years. Someone figured out that it saves time to have someone planted in an organization who not only watches but encourages groups to commit violence, so the feds can swoop in and catch them right before they act. The domestic version, COINTELPRO, was exposed by a Sen. Frank Church in the 70s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee

This also happens today with peace groups, and even liberal discussion boards. Out of the blue, someone will start talking about blowing stuff up or killing people (they are always immediately barred from the board).

It is not a big leap of the imagination to incite people so you can catch them to inciting them and just letting them act if it serves your purpose. An Israeli paper reported that Mossad agents were caught recruiting an Al Qaeda cell in Gaza, not trying to infiltrate an existing one, but actually start one.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2550513.stm

Our government has in fact commissioned terrorist acts in other countries. PBS' Frontline did a story on terrorism in the 80s and noted that after the Marine Corps barracks bombing, we contacted Saudi Prince Bandar to set up an "off the books" car bombing of a cleric outside his mosque. Money was funneled through Bandar's wife to the 9/11 hijackers.

Right now, Venezuela is trying to extradite a terrorist in the US who planted a bomb on a Cuban airliner that killed 73 civilians
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58297-2005Apr16.html

You can see the supporting primary documents here:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB153/

Is it such a big step to go from doing this overseas to doing it here? Think about the Bush response to the hurricane in New Orleans. They didn't just fumble the response, they actively blocked help from coming in from other countries and even domestically.

I know this will sound nutty to a lot of people, but you have to think who has benefited from al Qaeda's attacks, and when else OUR government has known about these guys' activities and done nothing, like before 9/11. The FBI had an informant living with some of the hijackers.

Sibel Edmonds, an FBI translator, was going to testify in a lawsuit by 9/11 families about similar information when John Ashcroft retroactively classified her information. A judge has allowed Edmonds to speak, and this is part of what she had to say:

Over four years ago, more than four months prior to the September 11 terrorist attacks, in April 2001, a long-term FBI informant/asset who had been providing the bureau with information since 1990, provided two FBI agents and a translator with specific information regarding a terrorist attack being planned by Osama Bin Laden. This asset/informant was previously a high- level intelligence officer in Iran in charge of intelligence from Afghanistan. Through his contacts in Afghanistan he received information that:

1) Osama Bin Laden was planning a major terrorist attack in the United States targeting 4-5 major cities,

2) the attack was going to involve airplanes,

3) some of the individuals in charge of carrying out this attack were already in place in the United States,

4) the attack was going to be carried out soon, in a few months.

The agents who received this information reported it to their superior, Special Agent in Charge of Counterterrorism, Thomas Frields, at the FBI Washington Field Office, by filing “302” forms, and the translator, Mr. Behrooz Sarshar, translated and documented this information. No action was taken by the Special Agent in Charge, Thomas Frields, and after 9/11 the agents and the translators were told to ‘keep quiet’ regarding this issue.

http://justacitizen.org/articles_documents/FBI%20&%20911.htm

Back in the 60s, the Joint Chiefs of Staff recommending staging a terrorist attack on the US and blaming Cuba. This isn't an urban legend--the documents have been declassified through a Freedom of Information Act request.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

I don't know what we can do about this, but it's something to keep in mind when the next terrorist attack comes.

KEY EXCERPTS:

March 25, 2004

Al-Qaeda cleric exposed as an MI5 double agent

By Daniel McGrory and Richard Ford

Allies say warnings were ignored

ONE of al-Qaeda’s most dangerous figures has been revealed as a double agent working for MI5, raising criticism from European governments, which repeatedly called for his arrest.

Britain ignored warnings — which began before the September 11 attacks — from half a dozen friendly governments about Abu Qatada’s links with terrorist groups and refused to arrest him. Intelligence chiefs hid from European allies their intention to use the cleric as a key informer against Islamic militants in Britain.

Abu Qatada boasted to MI5 that he could prevent terrorist attacks and offered to expose dangerous extremists, while all along he was setting up a haven for his terror organisation in Britain.

Among the scores of young militants who came to visit him in London was the chief suspect in the Madrid train bombings. His followers also included people who wanted to be suicide bombers for al-Qaeda, such as Richard Reid, the shoe bomber.

His continued liberty for years after international demands for his arrest was an embarrassment for Britain. When David Blunkett introduced his controversial Anti-terrorism Crime and Security Act, 2001, which allowed him to detain foreign suspects without trial, Abu Qatada claimed that the law “was enacted with him particularly in mind”.

He disappeared from his family home in West London just before the law came into force.

FULL TEXT:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-3-1050175,00.html

sibel edmonds agent provocateur george w bush, iraq war, war on terror, muslim, public opinion, opinion, public relations, foreign policy, lies al qaeda false flag cointelpro northwoods propaganda terrorist

Cheney plans to nuke Iran

Some variation of an attack on Iran was in the pipe, whether the administration had gotten into this embarrassment with Karl Rove and the Downing Street Minutes or not.

The only questions have been 1) how would they justify it, and 2) how would they do it with our troops tied up in Iraq, and the draft likely to cause an uncontrollable backlash.

This seems to imply the answers to both:

1) terrorist attack on US

2) use nukes on Iran, leaving fewer people left to fight there.

The American people would balk at using nuclear weapons unless the attack on the US was itself was nuclear. Neither Iran nor any other country has a motive to use nukes on the US, knowing that it would result in overwhelming retaliation and the destruction of their government and most of their people.

The last line of the excerpt from the American Conservative magazine is the only one that gives me hope, and has come up on other issues too: the military is uncomfortable with what they are being asked to do. This is how we know about Abu Ghraib. A soldier passed along those photos to Seymour Hersh because he thought what was transpiring was wrong, and when the torture policy and detainment policies were being written, Navy JAG officers were so alarmed, they contacted human rights lawyers in DC.

Eventually, we will come to a moment like the one that occurred in the Soviet Union when the hardliners attempted a coup against Gorbachev--the military refused to fire on or act against their own people. It would be better if our elected leaders corrected this problem, but if they do not, our last line of defense is the conscience of those in our military.

You should forward this to your congressman and senators and ask them to investigate and if they approve of allowing a terrorist attack in the US as a pretext for nuking and invading Iran.

http://firstgov.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml

KEY EXCERPTS:

The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option.

As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States.

Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing--that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack--but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.

FULL TEXT:

http://www.amconmag.com/2005a/2005_08_01/article3.html





nuclear weapons iraq war wmd terrorism oil nuclear program president george w bush airstrike attack dick cheney republican GOP conservative corruption occupation halliburton colonialism white mans burden professor smartass iraq peak oil propaganda corporation fascism political opinion agent provocateur george w bush war on terror public opinion opinion public relations foreign policy al qaeda false flag cointelpro northwoods terrorist worst president ever failure war criminal idiot retard closet gay nazi smartass comments resistance censored news rebel