Libya: Torture, Murder, Terror, the Deep State and Gladio

Editorial Comment:

“You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force…the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”

Vincenzo Vinciguerra
The Gladio Strategy of Tension

The following article, written by Sibel Edmonds on January 18, 2013, describes the deep state agenda behind events  that have been unfolding in Libya since the assassination of Muammar Gaddafi.

I have also included Sibel’s interviews with James Corbett where she describes NATO operations under what was once known as “Gladio“, now “Gladio B, a NATO-directed effort to radicalize, enable and protect Islamic terrorists to further their own geopolitical ends“. *

Death squads, arbitrary arrests, disappearances, terrorism, assassinations and torture are the essence of the “creative chaos” modus operandi, vital to the Gladio “strategy of tension”.

I have never accepted the narrative that the current regime in Libya are trying to control the militias. Al Qaeda, the militias and the Supreme Security Council are interconnected components of NATO’s Gladio B network.

Keeping in mind the Gladio methodology…through terror, “…force…the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security“… I am suspicious of calls for a national army as an answer to the violence because that army will neither serve nor protect the people.

In Libya, through the mechanism of the fascist political isolation law, all institutions have been purged of competent individuals who possess integrity and would challenge the neocolonial agenda by restoring order and justice.

The US and NATO have been training and installing their own army to control the population and ensure unrestricted access to key resources, which include oil and gas, pristine  water from the underground aquifer and rare earth minerals.

They have also established several strategic bases of operation where they train death squads which are sent to targeted countries in Africa and the Middle East.

Therefore, order will not emerge from chaos through  the creation of an army that will protect NATO’s interests, but through the complete overthrow of the client regime and the removal of all occupation forces and their collaborators.

Alexandra Valiente
© Copyright 2013 by Libya 360°Jamahiriya News Agency
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on one of his many visits to Libya.

Harvesting the Fruits of Regime Change in Libya: NATO Member Turkey to Train Libya’s New Police Force

Sibel Edmonds
Jan 18, 2012
Additional links added by Libya 360°

In the last few decades one never-changing modus operandi in our imperial pursuits and operations overseas has been the formation, financing, training, control and domination of our target countries’ military force. Egypt, Morocco, Kuwait, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia … whether here right in our backyard under joint Pentagon and military industrial complex mega corporations or abroad, through our tentacles-NATO member nations, we’ve always ensured holding the most important string in ruling and managing our overseas puppetries- their military. Because, admit it, the figure-head dictators come and go; rise and fall; are made and destroyed, easily and frequently. On the other hand, their ruling military elite are more of a constant. Think Egypt: ‘Bye-bye Mubarak, stay put military regime.’ However, all that seems to be changing. We are getting savvier, more ambitious and far greedier. We want more: more control. Thus, welcome our new extended imperial sphere: Police Force a la USA.

According to the latest news, of course not covered by US media, our NATO Member Turkey will be training the new Libyan Police Force. Let’s read this extremely important new development with even more important implications [All Emphasis Mine]:

Turkey has started negotiations with Libya to begin training the country’s police force, which is being rebuilt after Libya’s violent counter-revolution that began in February 2011 that ended the 42-year era of Muammar Gaddafi.

A delegation from the Turkish General Directorate of Security, headed by Deputy National Police Chief Ahmet Pek, traveled to the Libyan capital of Tripoli on Saturday to discuss projects related to Libyan police training in Turkey. The Turkish delegation considered the issue with Libyan Interior Affairs Minister Omar al-Hadravi on Sunday.

The meeting was also attended by high-ranking Libyan security officers. The officials talked about the resumption of Libyan police education, which was interrupted during the civil war, in Turkish police academies. They also discussed the possibility of including primary vocational training in the Libyan police force for former armed insurgents, in Turkey.

Pek stated that the Turkish delegation supplied necessary equipment for Libyan police forces during their recent visit and said they will be delivered to Libyan leaders during an official ceremony in Tripoli this week.

We all know about Turkey’s ‘water-bearer’ position for the West as an important and the only Muslim NATO member. However, what is not well-known here in the United States, thanks to its media’s complete submission to government, military mega corporations and foreign lobby powers, is Turkey’s internationally recognized status and fame for its atrocious police brutality and abuses.

In a damning report, Human Rights Watch said complaints against the police for excessive force had risen sharply since the start of last year while the number of officers convicted had dropped. A total of 3,339 people had complained about police ill-treatment in 2007, up from 2,854 the year before, but only 48 of those complaints had led to convictions.

The 80-page report, Closing Ranks Against Accountability, recounts numerous cases of suspects dying or suffering serious injury at the hands of police, sometimes after being stopped for routine identity checks. Police frequently cover up evidence while accused officers are routinely exonerated after internal disciplinary proceedings, the report says.

The rise in violent incidents was partly attributable, he said, to laws introduced by the governing Justice and Development party (AKP), which has built its image on a reform programme designed to aid Turkey’s EU membership bid. These include a law permitting police to use lethal force before it becomes a “last resort” necessary to prevent a threat to life, another allowing officers to conduct identity checks without reasonable grounds for suspicion, and anti-terrorism legislation enabling suspects to be detained for 24 hours without access to a lawyer.

Turkey has held on to its record as one of the world champions in extreme torture practices thanks to the direct financial and training support from its US masters:

When a harsh report asserting that torture is widespread in Turkey was released this week, the surprise was not just the amount of damning evidence it contained, but also the source. Rather than being prepared by a private advocacy group, the report was the work of the parliamentary committee on human rights.

For years, Turkish leaders have sought to play down accusations that torture is widely practiced here. That will be harder after what the parliamentary committee found. Its report contains transcripts of interviews with many prisoners who said they had been abused. It also includes photos of torture equipment and floor plans that show where torture cells are supposedly located in various police stations. No report by a government human rights body has ever been nearly this extensive or graphic.

Committee members and investigators interviewed more than 8,500 prisoners during a two-year period. They also conducted unannounced visits to 50 prisons and two dozen police stations, said the vice chairman, Sebgetullah Seydaoglu.

“This committee has existed for seven years but it hasn’t been functioning properly,” said Mr. Seydaoglu, who represents the southeastern city of Diyarbakir, where the mostly Kurdish population has long complained of bad treatment by police. “In the last year we’ve become very decisive about our mission.”

Even Turkey’s financial and procedural backers in torture practices couldn’t help but admit to its status.

The United States State Department said in its latest human rights report that during 1999 “torture, beatings and other abuses by security forces remained widespread, at times resulting in deaths.”

Human rights advocates are unhappy with the government’s record. The bluntness of the new parliamentary report suggests that impatience for change is growing.”This report says what we have been saying for years, that torture is extensive and systematic in Turkey,” said Nazmi Gur, chairman of the Human Rights Association, which has often been at odds with the government. “This could be the beginning of progress toward meeting European legal standards.”

Maybe a few videos would better depict the Turkish police’s claim to fame:

Torture: routine for Turkish police

Rather than filling many hundreds of pages with examples and reports I invite all readers to run a search for credible reports and documentations on Turkish police and its record on torture, violence and other brutalities. This is the kind of police force and practices that have been deemed appropriate for the New Libya by US-NATO powers. The new trend has begun – we not only form, train, finance and command these nations’ military forces, but we now extend our ruling into their daily lives on the street via selecting, training, arming, financing, and controlling their police forces.

The United States has fulfilled its main objective on Libya: regime change; replacing it with its own regime, one that will be brutal and abusive of its people. The only difference – the strings will be fully in its hand.

Gladio Revisited

Sibel Edmonds of joins us for our series on Gladio B, the NATO-directed effort to radicalize, enable and protect Islamic terrorists to further their own geopolitical ends.

Gladio in Libya

Two Years After Muammar Gaddafi: Western Intelligence and Qatar Govern Libya, Not Libyans
Terrorists running Libya getting rid of ‘old friends’, turning them over to the US
Libyan Soldiers Start Military Training in Turkey
Niger’s president says Libya risks becoming like Somalia
NATO in Libya: An Avalanche of Unfolding Disasters
FBI Training Criminal Investigators in Dubai and Libya
USAFRICOM’s Proxy Army and the Recolonization of Africa
Tribal Spokesman, Faraj Muftah: Libya is in anarchy as US – NATO backed terrorists reign
De-Facto Libya no Longer Exists as a Nation, Only Fragmented Territories
Violence, Chaos and the Abduction of Zeidan are a Smokescreen Concealing the Imperial Agenda in Libya (Arabic)
Dr. Yusuf Shakir: Libya is No Longer a State. Violence Will Spread to Other Countries.

Militia firing on unarmed demonstrators in the Garghour district of Tripoli

NATO’s African Standby Force
Who Are The Libyan Freedom Fighters And Their Patrons?
Murder and Theft up 500% in NATO’s “State of Libya”
The Names Of Over 1000 Political Prisoners In Libya Detained Because They Are Black
Tragic Massacre Of Tawerghan Refugees In The Janzour Refugee Camp Today. Take Action!
Torture Of Libya’s Political Prisoners: Statement From Doctors Without Borders
Amnesty International Report On The New Libya: Widespread Detainee Deaths And Torture
HRW Letter To The ICC Prosecutor On Amnesty Laws
Reporters Sans Frontières Condemn New Laws Criminalizing Insulting Government Institutions

Libyan Lawyers Condemn Amnesty And Glorification Laws
Libya: Revoke Draconian New Law – Legislation Criminalizes Free Speech
NATO Has Turned Libya Into A Concentration Camp
Dr. Omar Brebish, Former Libyan Ambassador In Paris, Tortured To Death by the Zintan Militia
Armed Militias, Political Prisoners And The Libyan Judiciary
Bani Walid

Gladio – Past and Present

Introduction to NATO’s Gladio B
Boston Terror, CIA’s Graham Fuller & NATO-CIA Operation Gladio B-Caucasus & Central Asia
Gladio B: The Origins of NATO’s Secret Islamic Terrorist Proxies
US Government Protection of Al-Qaeda Terrorists and the US-Saudi Black Hole
The Pseudo-War on Terror: How the US Has Protected Some of Its Enemies
NATO, Gladio and America’s Unchecked Security State (Parts I & II)
Democracy and the Secret State: The Deception and Terrorisation of Populaces from the Era of Gladio to the War on Terror
Georgia: CIA-NATO Trains Arab Partners At Mountain Training Center
Are the Boston Marathon Bombings Tied to a New American Campaign into the Caucasus
The Pentagon Declares War on America
Boston Terror: The Syria Objective is Nearly Accomplished? [Update]
UN Silent on US – CIA – NATO Crimes: Long History of War, Coups, Color Revolutions and Genocide
50 Years After the Assassination of JFK: Why it Still Matters
Norway Terror as Systemic Destabilization
Ergenekon: Turkish Gladio and the Deep State
NATO, Libya and Turkey: Drones and Other Sinister Military Deals
Turkey Purchases Libyan Oil, Abandons Iran
More new Libyan police recruits are also being trained in Qatar, the UAE, Jordan and the UK
Libya-Turkey $20 billion payments deal seems nearer
US Occupation Regime To Install Their Own Commandos In Libya
The Greater Middle East Project
Systemic Destabilization in Recent American History: 9/11, the JFK Assassination, and the Oklahoma City Bombing as a Strategy of Tension
USA: The Creator & Sustainer of Chechen Terrorism
NATO, Gladio and America’s Unchecked Security State (Parts I & II)
Boston Terror: The Syria Objective is Nearly Accomplished?
CIA MO Not the FBI, Contradictions from Dagestan, Recent Shooting Incident in Dagestan, Georgia-NATO-Russia & More
Sibel Edmonds on the Boston Bombing
The Doomsday Project, Deep Events, and the Shrinking of American Democracy
The Doomsday Project and Deep Events: JFK, Watergate, Iran-Contra, and 9/11
“Continuity of Government Planning” with Peter Dale Scott. The process by which the U.S. Constitution has already been superseded
Counter-Intelligence: Shining a Light on Black Operations
The Pentagon Declares War on America
UN Report Stresses Flow of Weapons from Libya to Terrorists in Syria across Turkey and Northern Lebanon
MI6/CIA/Al-Qaeda Nexus In The Lynching Of Christopher Stevens In Benghazi
“NATO only yields destruction, insecurity and misery. It must be abolished”
Abolish The CIA!


  1. Mudiwa says:
    African Standby Force (Read Stay Behind Army) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Rwandan peacekeepers returning home from Darfur The African Standby Force (French: Force africaine en attente)[1] is intended to be an international, continental African military force, with both a civilian and police component, under the direction of the African Union. It is to be deployed in times of crisis in Africa. In 2003, a 2010 operational date for the force was set.[2] The genesis of the African Standby Force is contained in a document which provides a framework for the structure of the ASF. The establishment of the ASF has been envisioned in two parts: 1. Regional Economic Communities would complement the African Union by establishing regional standby forces up to a brigade size. 2. In time, the idea is that the AU will be good enough at peacekeeping activities to handle missions with varying degrees of complexity, thereby allowing the ASF to maintain a purely supplemental role. Currently, Africa’s five regions are in the process of setting up their regional brigades and agreeing on issues of harmonisation and standardisation between them. Current seat is Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Each brigade is to have a planning element and brigade headquarters, as well as assigned units from member states. Regions and status are provisionally as follows: North Africa: The Arab Maghreb Union cooperating with Egypt were initially designated to act as the regional organisation which would create and support the brigade. For some time, intra-regional differences prevented any progress at all. However, a new mounting body, the North Africa Regional Capability, has now been created to take on the role of the REC for Northern Africa.[3] It signed a MoU with the AU in January 2008. [2] U.S. diplomatic reporting in March 2009 from Addis Ababa said that AU PSC Commissioner Ramtane Lamamra said the North African brigade “was “catching up” quickly. He said Egypt will provide headquarters for the brigade and contribute one battalion. Algeria has pledged two autonomous battalions and two additional support companies, while Libya is offering helicopter support. Tunisia has signed an MOU, but the nature of its pledge is not yet known, said Lamamra.”[4] West Africa: The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Standby Force is being established as a 1,500 strong ready battalion group as the first element of a 6,500 strong brigade. In mid 2008 a first exercise at Bamako, Mali evaluated the capabilities of the assigned units of the force.[5] It has been reported that the Nigerian Army battalion assigned to the force is located at Okitipupa in southwest Nigeria. Discussions continue over the use of a logistics depot at Hastings, Sierra Leone. A multinational planning cell is located at Abuja, Nigeria under Brigadier General Hassan Lai of the Nigerian Army.[6] It was reported in May 2010 that: ‘Altogether, the ECOWAS Standby Force consists of a Task Force and a Main Force. The Task Force, composed of 2773 personnel from the predetermined units including 200 police personnel, consists of a Headquarters, two Infantry Battalions (West and East) and a Logistics battalion. On order, the Task Force is to deploy within 30 days and be self-sustained for 90 days. The West ESF Battalion, led by Senegal, with membership of Guinea Bissau, Burkina Faso, Guinea-Conakry and Gambia, was evaluated during the joint Senegal/France field training exercise held in December 2007. The Logistics battalion, led by Mali and Nigeria as second-in-command, with additional membership of Burkina Faso, Mali and Senegal, was validated in Burkina Faso in June 2009.’ The East Battalion was validated in a multinational military field training exercise in May 2010.[7] Central Africa: The Economic Community of Central African States is the nominated regional organisation. A meeting of Defence Chiefs of Staff was held in Brazzaville in October 2003, at which it was decided that a brigade-size peacekeeping force, the Central African Multinational Force (French acronym FOMAC) would be created in order to intervene in unstable Central African areas.[8] The meeting recommended that military planners from each of the ECCAS states form a group to work out the details for the force. They also suggested the establishment of a joint peacekeeping training centre and military exercises every two years. The first of these is to take place in Chad. By 2008, the regional PLANELM in Libreville had 13 members, including six from the region and seven from Gabon. The regional logistics base was to be established in Douala.[9] East Africa: The force is now known as the Eastern Africa Standby Force (EASF), while the EAstern Africa Standby Brigade Coordination Mechanism (EASBRICOM) was the supporting secretariat. The Brigade HQ and logistics base are both located at Addis Ababa while the planning element is in Nairobi. [10] An experts’ meeting in 2007 identified a number of duplications between the existing Planning Element and Brigade headquarters structures.[11] Southern Africa: A Southern African Development Community (SADC) brigade (SADCBRIG) has been used already as the basis for AU deployments in the Sudan(?). The brigade was officially launched on 17 August 2007 in Lusaka, Zambia.[12] The Brigade planning element are located in Gaborone, Botswana, as part of the SADC Secretariat.[13] Douala, in Cameroon, was in 2011 selected as the site of the AU’s Continental Logistics Base. Contents 1 See also 2 References 3 Further reading 4 External links See also fr:École de maintien de la paix Alioune Blondin Beye de Bamako – the intermediate level peacekeeping school for the ECOWAS component of the ASF References ^ ^ Stephen Burgess, The African Standby Force, Subregional Commands, and African Militaries, Air War College ^ Johan Potgieter, Peacekeeping Forces for Peace Support Operations in Africa[dead link], Africa Peace Support Trainers’ Association, 4 August 2009 ^ U.S. Mission to the African Union, USAU: Africa Command Deputy Meets with AU Peace and Security Commissioner Lamamra, 09ADDISABABA735, 30 March 2009, via United States diplomatic cables leak ^ ECOWAS ^ [1], February 2009 ^ ECOWAS Multinational Military Field Training Exercise Ends, Monday, May 3, 2010, via ^ UK House of Commons, House of Commons Written Answers 28 April 2004, part 37, accessed March 2009 ^ Ulf Engel, João Gomes Porto, Africa’s New Peace and Security Architecture: Promoting Norms, Institutionalzing Solutions, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2010, 136 ^ Jane’s Defence Weekly, February 2009 ^ East African Brigade Coordination Mechanism, Report of the Experts Workshop on the Concept of Cooperation in Peace and Security in the Eastern Africa Region, Seychelles, 24-26 September 2007 ^, Zambia: Mwanawasa: Launch of the SADC Brigade (17/08/2007) ^ Jakkie Cilliars and Mark Malan, Progress with the African Standby Force, Institute for Security Studies, Pretoria, 2005 Further reading Franke, Benedikt. Security Cooperation in Africa: A Reappraisal. Boulder, Colo: FirstForumPress, 2009. Bachmann, Olaf. The African Standby Force: External Support to an ‘African Solution to African Problems’?, IDS Research Report 67, Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, 2011 Guicherd, Catherine. The AU in Sudan: Lessons for the African Standby Force, New York, International Peace Academy, 2007 External links ACCORD, The African Standby Force and Regional Standby Brigades, Conflict Trends 2008/3 Virginia Gamba, SADC Security Cooperation and Progress with the SADC Brigade, SaferAfrica, February 2008, accessed May 2010 African Standby Force Steve Mbogo, African Peacekeeping Force Development Continues Despite Funding Challenges, World Politics Watch, Dec. 21, 2006. ECOWAS, U.S. Donates Equipment to ECOWAS Standby Force, Press Release 079/09, August 22, 2009 Rick Rozoff, Pentagon Carves Africa Into Military Zones, May 5, 2010 – article contains much recent ASF related activities by African and non-African powers, December 2005 Ergenekon (organization) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search For other uses, see Ergenekon. Ergenekon Motives Overthrowing the current government Active region(s) Turkey Status Standing trial Size Several hundred suspects Ergenekon is the name given to an alleged clandestine, secularist ultra-nationalist[1] organization in Turkey with possible ties to members of the country’s military and security forces.[2] The would-be group, named after Ergenekon, a mythical place located in the inaccessible valleys of the Altay Mountains, is accused of terrorism in Turkey.[3] Ergenekon is by some believed to be part of the “deep state.”[4] The existence of the “deep state” was affirmed in Turkish opinion after the Susurluk scandal in 1996.[5] Alleged members have been indicted on charges of plotting to foment unrest, among other things by assassinating intellectuals, politicians, judges, military staff, and religious leaders, with the ultimate goal of toppling the incumbent government.[6][7] Ergenekon’s modus operandi has been compared to Operation Gladio‘s Turkish branch, the Counter-Guerrilla.[8][9] By April 2011, over 500 people had been taken into custody and nearly 300 formally charged with membership of what prosecutors described as “the Ergenekon terrorist organization,” which they claimed had been responsible for virtually every act of political violence – and controlled every terrorist group – in Turkey over the last 30 years.[10] Contents 1 Overview 2 Discovery 2.1 Tuncay Güney’s testimony (2001) 2.2 Grenades in Ümraniye (2007) 3 Material evidence 3.1 Discoveries until 2007 3.1.1 Chronology 3.1.2 Incidents 3.2 Discoveries in 2007 3.3 Discoveries after 2007 4 Legal Proceedings 5 Debate on Ergenekon 6 See also 7 References 8 External links Overview An organization named “Ergenekon” has been talked about since the Susurluk scandal, which exposed a similar gang. However, it is said that Ergenekon has undergone serious changes since then. The first person to publicly talk about the organization was retired naval officer Erol Mütercimler, who spoke of such an organization in 1997.[11][12] Mütercimler said he heard of the original organization’s existence from retired general Memduh Ünlütürk, who was involved in the anti-communist Ziverbey interrogations following the 1971 coup.[13] Major general Ünlütürk told Mütercimler that Ergenekon was founded with the support of the CIA and the Pentagon.[14] Mütercimler was detained during the Ergenekon investigation for questioning before being released.[11] Mütercimler and others, however, draw a distinction between the Ergenekon of today and the original one, which they equate with the Counter-Guerrilla; Operation Gladio‘s Turkish branch.[15] Today’s Ergenekon is said to be a “splinter” off the old one.[16][17] The person whose testimony contributed most to the indictment, Tuncay Güney, described Ergenekon as a junta related to the Turkish Resistance Organization (Turkish: Türk Mukavemet Teşkilatı, TMT) operating in North Cyprus; the TMT was established by founding members of the Counter-Guerrilla.[18] Former North Cyprus President Rauf Denktaş denied any connection of the TMT to Ergenekon.[19] Another position is that while some of the suspects may be guilty of something, there is no organization to which they are all party, and that the only thing they have in common is opposition to the AKP.[20] There is evidence to suggest that some – but only some – of the defendants named in the indictments have been engaged in illegal activity and that others – again far from all – hold eccentric or distasteful political opinions and worldviews.[21] There are also allegations that Ergenekon’s agenda is in line with the policies of the NSC, elaborated in the top-secret “Red Book” (the National Security Policy Document).[22] Based on documents prepared by one of the prosecutors, an article in Sabah (newspaper) says that the alleged organization consists of six cells with the following personnel:[23] Secret and civil cells liaisons: Veli Küçük and Muzaffer Tekin. Lobbyists: M. Zekeriya Öztürk, Kemal Kerinçsiz, İsmail Yıldız, and Erkut Ersoy. NGO head: Sevgi Erenerol. Kemal Kerinçsiz (assistant). Theory, Propaganda, and Disinformation Department head: Doğu Perinçek. Mafia structuring head: Veli Küçük. Muzaffer Tekin (assistant). Underground contacts: Ali Yasak, Sami Hoştan, Semih Tufan Gülaltay, and Sedat Peker. Terrorist organizations heads: Veli Küçük and Doğu Perinçek. University structuring: Kemal Yalçın Alemdaroğlu, Emin Gürses, Habib Ümit Sayın. Research and information gathering head: Mehmet Zekeriya Öztürk. Judicial branch heads: Kemal Kerinçsiz, Fuat Turgut, and Nusret Senem. Of those, the structure of only the “Theory” department had been revealed as of September 2008.[24][25] Some have called Veli Küçük the leader in the organization.[26] Şamil Tayyar of the Star daily says that Küçük is not “even among the top ten.”[27] MİT reportedly informed the prosecutor about the identity of the “number one” in the organization, but this will not be made public.[28] In most cases the name is shown as having derived from the Ergenekon myth; a place in Eurasia of mythological significance, esp. among nationalists (see Agartha).[29] The legend was vigorously promulgated during the early years of the Turkish Republic as Atatürk sought to create a nation state in which national consciousness rather than religion served as the primary determinant of identity.[21] With the growing number of detentions and subsequent court cases (see: Ergenekon (trials)) not many people still really understand what is happening.[30] (also see chapter: Debate on Ergenekon) Discovery Although the investigation was officially launched in 2007, the existence of the organization was known beforehand. The files on Ergenekon were discovered after a spy called Tuncay Güney got detained in March 2001 for petty fraud. Some say the crime was a ploy to set the investigation in motion. A police search of his house turned up the six sacks of evidence on which the indictment is based. One month later, a columnist on good terms with the government, Fehmi Koru, was the first to break the news,[31] under his usual pen name, Taha Kıvanç.[32] His article was based on a key Ergenekon report dated 29 October 1999 and titled “Ergenekon: Analysis, Structuring, Management, and Development Project”.[33][34] Tuncay Güney’s testimony (2001) Main article: Tuncay Güney The person whose statements to the police in 2001 formed “the backbone of the indictment”[35] was a spy named Tuncay Güney, alias “İpek”. Güney is believed to be subordinate to Mehmet Eymür, formerly of the National Intelligence Organization (MİT)’s Counterterrorism Department. Eymür was discharged and his department disbanded in 1997. Güney’s relationship to the MİT has been a matter of confusion; his boss was once a MİT employee, while the MİT says Güney was not (specifically, he was not a “registered informant”) and that the MİT considered him a suspicious person.[36][37][38][39] He had allegedly been tasked with infiltrating the gendarmerie‘s intelligence agency, JITEM, and Ergenekon in 1992.[40] Güney was apprehended in 2001 for issuing fake licenses and plates for luxury cars. He is still sentenced in absentia for this offense.[41] No charges have been brought against him in the frame of the Ergenekon investigation, some say as a result of a bargain struck with the authorities.[42] However, he is currently under investigation,[43] and State Prosecutor Ziya Hurşit Karayurt has proposed that he be subpoenaed.[44] The court is deliberating whether to consolidate his earlier case with the Ergenekon one.[45] In addition, legal proceedings have been initiated to obtain his testimony from abroad using Interpol.[46] Prosecutor Öz has prepared a list of 37 questions for Güney, who says he will co-operate if the questioning is done by the Canadian police.[47] Güney has been said to conflate fact and fiction,[48][49] casting doubt over the indictment, which names him a “fugitive suspect” (Turkish: firari şüpheli).[50] Güney is seen as such an important figure that rival press groups have exchanged columns accusing one another of attempting to influence public opinion by questioning his credibility.[51][52][53] It is alleged that one the parties, Aydın Doğan, was asked not to publish material about Ergenekon, by Veli Küçük through Doğu Perinçek.[54] In December 2008, Güney said that a Hürriyet reporter offered him a bribe not to talk about the newspaper, one of whose senior members is allegedly in Ergenekon.[55] Hürriyet denied the allegations.[56][57] Grenades in Ümraniye (2007) The investigation officially began after the Trabzon Gendarmerie Headquarters’ tip-off line received an anonymous call on 12 June 2007 saying that grenades and C-4 explosives were to be found at Güngör Sokak № 2, Çakmak Mahallesi, Ümraniye (41°1′13.69″N 29°7′10.21″ECoordinates: 41°1′13.69″N 29°7′10.21″E). A search warrant was immediately obtained from the Ümraniye 2. Peace Penal Court. 27 hand grenades (but no C-4) were found in a nylon-covered wooden chest on the roof of a slum at the stated address. According to the indictment, the caller was Şevki Yiğit, the father of the building’s tenant, Ali Yiğit. Şevki found the bomb-filled chest by accident and asked his son about them. Ali then asked the owner of the house, his uncle Mehmet Demirtaş about it. According to Yiğit, Demirtaş responded that there was a chest with military equipment on the roof belonging to ÖHD NCO Oktay Yıldırım, and instructed him to keep quiet about it. Ali Yiğit added that retired captain Muzaffer Tekin and retired NCO Mahmut Öztürk, both of the special forces, once stopped by his grocery store (adjacent to the slum, and owned by Demirtaş) in a black Mercedes while Yıldırım was present, that Yıldırım left only to return with Öztürk 15–20 minutes later in a yellow Opel Corsa, and that his father found the bombs 3–4 months later. Yiğit said that his father, who lives in Trabzon, might have placed the call since he was not on good terms with Demirtaş.[58][59] The grenades were found to bear the same serial number as those used in 14 incidents throughout the country.[60][61][62] They were disposed of two weeks after their discovery on account of their not being preservable.[63] A search of Yıldırım’s office in Reina[64] and Muzaffer Tekin’s house revealed a secret document titled “Ergenekon Lobi” about the group’s plans. The information in the documents led the authorities to revisit the Tuncay Güney case. Yıldırım later denied the charges, though his fingerprints were found on the chest. During his trial, he referred to Demirtaş as a former subordinate soldier of his, and said that the four reports about his fingerprints contradicted one another. Yıldırım also alleged that Ali Yiğit failed to distinguish Tekin from Öztürk when brought to Bayrampaşa Prison.[65] Cross-examining Yiğit, Yıldırım asked him if Demirtaş was present when the police searched for the grenades. Yiğit said “no”, contradicting his earlier statement that Demirtaş had arrived after a phone call by the police. (Demirtaş said he was personally not present.)[66] At the thirteenth hearing, Ali Yiğit said that he mistook someone for Muzaffer Tekin, with whom he shared a cell in Bayrampaşa prison and bonded well enough to look up to as a father figure. He also stated that he had moved out of the building twenty days before they were found. After learning about the grenades, he left his job at the grocery, and became a taxi driver. He was allegedly driving by the house when the police came, and told them that the place was his so that they would not break down the door. However, his uncle Demirtaş did not trust Yiğit and left the keys to Yiğit’s brother. They fetched the keys, searched the house, had Yiğit confirm that the grenades had been found and that the house had not been harmed, then took him to the station to obtain his statement, described above. After being detained, Yiğit says he was intimidated by Demirtaş, Kerinçsiz, Yıldırım, and his lawyer. Yıldırım allegedly pressured Yiğit to incriminate his father (Şevki) by calling him a weapons smuggler.[66][67] Demirtaş strongly denied having made the explanation about the origin of the chest, as alleged by Yiğit. Demirtaş alleged that Yiğit confided to him that he had only seen pictures of Tekin at the police station.[66] According to Radikal, the police threatened him with 39 years in jail if he did not blame Oktay Yıldırım.[68] Material evidence A common objection to the investigation into the clandestine organization “Ergenekon” is that the group does not have the wherewithal to carry out large-scale militant acts. This section aims to clarify what is known about the munitions presented as evidence. This is also of relevance to linking acts allegedly carried out by the organization, as it has been alleged that weapons of the same type and serial number were found in several locations. Debate has focused in particular on the grenades, which can be uniquely identified by the fuse type (Turkish: fünye grubu) and batch number (Turkish: kafile numarası).[69] According to police officials, “HGR DM 41” indicates German origin, SPLITTER denotes a fragmentation grenade, “COMP-B” means composition B, “LOS” indicates European production up to NATO standards, while the number following “FMP” indicates the batch.[70] Discoveries until 2007 Chronology 4 December 1998: Two hand grenades were found in a house in Manisa province, Akhisar district. 26 February 1999: In İzmir province Urla district 10 hand grenades were found. 25 March 1999: In connection with an operation against the militant Islamic organization Hezbollah in Şırnak 41 people were arrested and of six hand grenades one was linked to the Ergenekon investigation. 26 May 1999: A hand grenade was thrown into the office of Nucu Portase in Trabzon province Of district. 30 December 2000: In İzmir province, Karşıyaka district a defence hand grenade was found. 29 July 2001: In Antalya province Alanya district three hand grenades were found in a hotel. 11 August 2001: In the centre of Hatay[disambiguation needed] a hand grenade was thrown at the car of Hayrettin Yavuz. 29 July 2002: A hand grenade was found in a dustbin in Kütahya. 27 February 2003: A hand grenade was found near the Eyüp Lyceum in İstanbul province Eyüp district. 18 May 2003: In the garden of Kerem Adıgüzel in Amasya province Merzifon district a hand grenade of MKE exploded. 25 November 2003: Hand grenades were found in the fields in Ağrı province Patnos district that had not exploded although the pins had been pulled. 9 May 2005: Two hand grenades were found on Serkan Şahin and Abdurrahman Dağ in Kırıkkale province Keskin district. 10 May 2006: A hand grenade thrown at the newspaper Cumhuriyet in İstanbul Şişli. 2 October 2006: In İzmir Konak district one of two hand grenades thrown into a coffee shop in Alsancak, killing İbrahim Çiftçi and injuring two persons reportedly relates to the Ergenekon investigation. 30 November 2006: In İstanbul Tuzla district a hand grenade of MKE brand was found. 11 December 2006: In the hotel “Iğdır Doğu” one MKE brand hand grenade was found.[71] Incidents Akhisar and Eyüp One of the two grenades recovered in Akhisar, Manisa had the serial number HGR DM 41 SPLITTER COMP-B LOS FMP 24. Another grenade from Eyüp, İstanbul had the serial number HGR DM 41 COMP-B LOS FMR-24.[70] Urla, İzmir (1999) One of the ten grenades had the serial number HGR DM 41 SPLITTER COMP-B LOS FMP 16.[70] Şemdinli (2005) Two grenades used in the Şemdinli incident on 9 November 2005 were found to bear the serial number HGR DM 41 SPLITTER COMP-B LOS FMP 134.[72] Cumhuriyet (2006) Alparslan bombed the offices of the newspaper Cumhuriyet in May 2006. The grenades did not go off in his first two attempts; he succeeded on his third. The NATO standard, Makine ve Kimya Endüstrisi Kurumu (MKE) model 44 grenades had the following serial numbers:[69] TAPA M 204 A 2/KF-MKE-91 12-77 (5 May 2006) TAPA M 204 A 2/KF-MKE-173 9-85 (10 May 2006) TAPA M 204 A 2/KF-MKE-91 12-77 (11 May 2006) The part before the slash denotes the fuse type, while the part after it denotes the batch number. For example, the batch number of the first entry means ‘batch 91, December 1977’. The army bought 8800 such grenades from the MKE in 1978.[63] Discoveries in 2007 Ümraniye, İstanbul (12 June 2007) The serial numbers of some of the 27 grenades found in Ümraniye are:[72] HGR DM 41 SPLITTER COMP-B LOS FMP 16 HGR DM 41 SPLITTER COMP-B LOS FMP 24 HGR DM 41 SPLITTER COMP-B LOS FMP 22 TAPA M 204 A2/KF-MKE-169 5-85[69] These grenades are registered to the Hasdal barracks in Istanbul.[73] Fikret Emek (26 June 2007) The recovered materiel included 11 kg of C-3, a telescopic rifle, a Kalashnikov, a shotgun, M-16 shells, 12 grenades (10 from the MKE), smoke bombs, 12 210g TNT setups, 6 500g TNT moulds, a 1.5 kg TNT mould, a 1 kg demolition block, ignition munitions. This is sufficient to flatten a twelve-floor reinforced concrete structure, with each floor over 400 m2.[74] The grenades have serial number TAPA M204 A2/KF-MKE-91 12-77, matching the ones from the Cumhuriyet attack.[69][75] Discoveries after 2007 Trabzon (13 December 2008) With the help of a tip-off on 3 December 2008,[76] the Trabzon police found nine grenades of the same batch number as those in Ümraniye. In nearby Yomra, the police seized a gun and eight 7.65 mm bullets for it, a Kalashnikov rifle and three chargers, a total of 420 7.62 mm Kalashnikov bullets and a grenade. In the city, eight grenades were found; seven hidden inside a washing machine, and another in an oven. Trabzon governor Nuri Okutan said that none of the suspects were public officials or members of the military.[77] The serial numbers of the Trabzon grenades are:[72] HGR DM 41 SPLITTER COMP-B LOS FMP 143 HGR DM 41 SPLITTER COMP-B LOS FMP 197 HGR DM 41 SPLITTER COMP-B LOS FMP 125 The grenades in Ümraniye had also been found following a tip-off in Trabzon. However, the former tip-off was to the gendarmerie rather than the police.[76] Mustafa Dönmez (7 January 2009) 22 grenades, over 100 bullets, 1 Kalashnikov, and 4 pistols were found in Dönmez’s vacation house in Sakarya.[75] İbrahim Şahin (7 January 2009) Three drawings and 9 unlicensed Glock pistols were found in the home of special forces police chief İbrahim Şahin. The drawings led to the excavation of 8000 bullets (mostly Uzi), 2 light-weight anti-tank weapons, 1 kg of plastic explosives, 10 hand grenades whose serial numbers had been removed and 10 smoke bombs. The recovered weapons were determined to be buried in July 2008 (the month generals Eruygur and Tolon were detained). They are reported to be different from the ones that were entrusted to Şahin’s department and went missing after Susurluk scandal.[78] Poyrazköy (April 2009) During excavations in Poyrazköy in <a title="Beykoz" href="http://en Gladio in Italy From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Gladio a
  2. Victoria says:
    In 2010 Gordon Duff said Al Qaeda was Gladio. I seldom agree with his political views but he was right about this. November 14th, 2010 “Operation Gladio is the heart of world terrorism, alive and well, and built by NATO, built by the United States and used against America and the world. Gladio, created to save us from communism, quickly became a terrorist organization itself, murdering political leaders, rigging elections, terror attacks to blame on one group or another. The “medicine” became the disease. It is now killing us. NATO built a terrorist organization of massive proportions. The remaining cells of Operation Gladio, one of the greatest disasters of military ignorance in history, are busy today. We call some of them “Al Qaeda.”” Sibel_Edmonds_Gladio_Mindmap Sword Play And Operation Gladio By Chris Floyd ‘You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force … the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.” This was the essence of Operation Gladio, a decades-long covert campaign of terrorism and deceit directed by the intelligence services of the West — against their own populations. Hundreds of innocent people were killed or maimed in terrorist attacks — on train stations, supermarkets, cafes and offices — which were then blamed on “leftist subversives” or other political opponents. The purpose, as stated above in sworn testimony by Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra, was to demonize designated enemies and frighten the public into supporting ever-increasing powers for government leaders — and their elitist cronies. First revealed by Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti in 1991, Gladio (from the Latin for “sword”) is still protected to this day by its founding patrons, the CIA and MI6. Yet parliamentary investigations in Italy, Switzerland and Belgium have shaken out a few fragments of the truth over the years. These have been gathered in a new book, “NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe,” by Daniele Ganser, as Lila Rajiva reports on Originally set up as a network of clandestine cells to be activated behind the lines in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe, Gladio quickly expanded into a tool for political repression and manipulation, directed by NATO and Washington. Using right-wing militias, underworld figures, government provocateurs and secret military units, Gladio not only carried out widespread terrorism, assassinations and electoral subversion in democratic states such as Italy, France and West Germany, but also bolstered fascist tyrannies in Spain and Portugal, abetted the military coup in Greece and aided Turkey’s repression of the Kurds. Among the “smoking guns” unearthed by Ganser is a Pentagon document, Field Manual FM 30-31B, which details the methodology for launching terrorist attacks in nations that “do not react with sufficient effectiveness” against “communist subversion.” Ironically, the manual states that the most dangerous moment comes when leftist groups “renounce the use of force” and embrace the democratic process. It is then that “U.S. army intelligence must have the means of launching special operations which will convince Host Country Governments and public opinion of the reality of the insurgent danger.” Naturally, these peace-throttling “special operations must remain strictly secret,” the document warns. Indeed, it would not do for the families of the 85 people ripped apart by the Aug. 2, 1980 bombing of the Bologna train station to know that their loved ones had been murdered by “men inside Italian state institutions and … men linked to the structures of United States intelligence,” as the Italian Senate concluded after its investigation in 2000. The Bologna atrocity is an example of what Gladio’s masters called “the strategy of tension” — fomenting fear to keep populations in thrall to “strong leaders” who will protect the nation from the ever-present terrorist threat. And as Rajiva notes, this strategy wasn’t limited to Western Europe. It was applied, with gruesome effectiveness, in Central America by the Reagan and Bush administrations. During the 1980s, right-wing death squads, guerrilla armies and state security forces — armed, trained and supplied by the United States — murdered tens of thousands of people throughout the region, often acting with particular savagery at those times when peaceful solutions to the conflicts seemed about to take hold. Last month, it was widely reported that the Pentagon is considering a similar program in Iraq. What was not reported, however — except in the Iraqi press — is that at least one pro-occupation death squad is already in operation. Just days after the Pentagon plans were revealed, a new militant group, “Saraya Iraqna,” began offering big wads of American cash for insurgent scalps — up to $50,000, the Iraqi paper Al Ittihad reports. “Our activity will not be selective,” the group promised. In other words, anyone they consider an enemy of the state will be fair game. Strangely enough, just as it appears that the Pentagon is establishing Gladio-style operations in Iraq, there has been a sudden rash of terrorist attacks on outrageously provocative civilian targets, such as hospitals and schools, the Guardian reports. Coming just after national elections in which the majority faction supported slates calling for a speedy end to the American occupation, the shift toward high-profile civilian slaughter has underscored the “urgent need” for U.S. forces to remain on the scene indefinitely, to provide security against the ever-present terrorist threat. Meanwhile, the Bushists continue constructing their long-sought permanent bases in Iraq: citadels to protect the oil that incoming Iraqi officials are promising to sell off to American corporations — and launching pads for new forays in geopolitical domination. Perhaps it’s just a coincidence. But the U.S. elite’s history of directing and fomenting terrorist attacks against friendly populations is so extensive — indeed, so ingrained and accepted — that it calls into question the origin of every terrorist act that roils the world. With each fresh atrocity, we’re forced to ask: Was it the work of “genuine” terrorists or a “black op” by intelligence agencies — or both? While not infallible, the ancient Latin question is still the best guide to penetrating the bloody murk of modern terrorism: Cui bono? Who benefits? Whose powers and policies are enhanced by the attack? For it is indisputable that the “strategy of tension” means power and profit for those who claim to possess the key to “security.” And from the halls of the Kremlin to the banks of the Potomac, this cynical strategy is the ruling ideology of our times. Operation Gladio Jump to: navigation, search Emblem of “Gladio”, Italian branch of the NATO “stay-behind” paramilitary organizations. The motto means “In silence I preserve freedom”. Contents 1 NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe 1.1 A digest of the Book “NATO’s Secret Armies” By Swiss historian Daniele Ganser 2 Digest 2.1 Judge Felice Casson 2.2 The Strategy of Tension 2.3 The Scandal Spreads 2.4 The EU Debate 2.5 Silence from NATO, CIA & MI6 2.6 Precursors 2.7 Made in the USA 2.8 Gladio-orchestrated coups in Italy. 2.9 Prudent precaution or Source of Terror? 2.10 CONCLUSION 3 Related Documents 4 See Also NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe A digest of the Book “NATO’s Secret Armies” By Swiss historian Daniele Ganser ISBN 0-7146-8500-3 – Paperback edition ISBN 0-7146-5607-0 – Hardback editions Digest NATO’s Secret Armies published in 2004 by Swiss historian Daniele Ganser is arguably the most shocking book ever to be ignored by the mainstream consensus. It describes in meticulously footnoted detail the existence of the so-called Gladio stay-behind networks which had been NATO’s best kept secret for forty or more years, and which briefly emerged into the daylight through a series of scandalous disclosures in Italy. These stay-behind networks were, in essence, secret armies in fourteen European countries created with the intent of remaining dormant and being activated in the event of a Soviet land invasion. Not only were these armies kept secret from the official governmental structures of the host countries – falling instead under the auspices of the CIA and MI6 – but compelling evidence emerged in the 90s to show that they went a long way beyond this original remit and participated in anti-democratic agitation and even terrorist atrocities. The name Gladio, (or ‘Sword’ in Italian) was technically the name given to their operations in Italy, but has since come by extension to stand for the phenomenon as a whole. Evidence of such arrangements, which had been kept secret from both public and politicians democratically elected governments in the host countries for a quarter of a century was revealed through a series of scandalous revelations in Italy and other NATO countries during the 90s, and meticulously documented by Ganser. The evidence contained in Ganser’s book, of terrorism directed against the people by secret armies funded and organised by NATO and answerable to NATO, MI6 and the CIA rather than the respective governments is so shocking that the initial reaction of most people would be to reject it. And yet the claims have been substantiated by juridical inquiries in Italy, Switzerland and Belgium and have been debated (and condemned) in the European Parliament. Judge Felice Casson The scandal originally came to light in Italy in 1984 when an Italian judge Felice Casson reopened the case of a terrorist car bomb in Peteano in 1972 and uncovered a series of anomalies in the original investigation. The atrocity which had originally been blamed on the communist Red Brigades turned out to be, in fact, the work of a right wing organization called Ordine Nuovo. Following the discovery of an arms cache near Trieste in 1972 containing C4 explosives identical to that used in the Peteano attack, Casson’s investigation revealed that the bombing in Peteano was the work of the military secret service SID (Servizio Informazioni Difesa) in conjunction with Ordine Nuovo. The intention had been to blame the bombing on the extreme left wing militant outfit, the Red Brigades. The right wing terrorist, Vincenzo Vinciguerra was arrested and charged and confessed to planting the bomb. Judge Casson’s investigation also revealed that the Peteano bombing was the continuation of a series of bombings begun at Christmas 1969, the most well-known of which, on the Piazza Fontane in Milan, killed 16 and injured 80. The bombing campaign culminated on 2 August 1980 with a massive bomb in the waiting room of Bologna railway station which killed 85 and injured 200. It was one of the largest terrorist outrages on mainland Europe in modern times. The Strategy of Tension During his trial, Vincenzo Vinciguerra revealed that, in addition to discrediting left wing political groups, there had been a second, even darker aim behind the bombings, namely to inculcate a climate of fear among the general populace. This was known as the ‘strategy of tension’ which was intended to generate a pervasive sense of fear which would encourage the population to appeal to the state for protection. Vincenzo Vinciguerra claimed during his trial:
    ‘You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public to turn to the State to ask for greater security.’
    In a BBC documentary Gladio, he described the aim as to ‘destabilise in order to stabilise’… ‘To create tension within the country to promote conservative, reactionary social and political tendencies.’ In 1990 Judge Casson was given permission by prime minister Giulio Andreotti to search the archives of the Italian military secret service Servizio informazioni sicurezza Militare (SISMI) where he found proof of the existence of the Gladio network, and links to NATO and the United States. Following this, on 3 August 1990 prime minister Andreotti confirmed to parliament the existence of the Gladio networks but claimed they had ceased operating in 1972. This was subsequently revealed to be false by the Italian press. Andreotti then admitted the existence of the Gladio networks and their connection to NATO.
    The secret Gladio army, as Andreotti revealed, was well armed. The equipmentprovided by the CIA was buried in 139 hiding spots across the country in forests, meadows and even under churches and cemeteries. According to the explanations of Andreotti the Gladio caches included ‘portable arms, ammunition, explosives, hand grenades, knives and daggers, 60 mm mortars, several 57 mm recoilless rifles, sniper rifles, radio transmitters, binoculars and various tools’. Andreotti’s sensational testimony did not only lead to an outcry concerning the corruption of the government and the CIA among the press and the population, but also to a hunt for the secret arms caches. Padre Giuciano recalls the day when the press came to search for the hidden Gladio secrets in his church with ambiguous feelings: ‘I was forewarned in the afternoon when two journalists from “Il Gazzettino” asked me if I knew anything about arms deposits here at the church. They started to dig right here and found two boxes right away. Then the text also said a thirty centimetres from the window. So they came over here and dug down. One box was kept aside by them because it contained a phosphorous bomb. They sent the Carabinieri outside whilst two experts opened this box, another had two machine guns in it. All the guns were new, in perfect shape. They had never been used.’ (DG p. 12)
    But he denied the claim of Vinceguerra that the Gladio armies had been involved in the domestic terrorism the country had witnessed. Despite that, a parliamentary commission in 2000 investigating Gladio explicitly rejected his denial and concluded to the contrary:
    ‘Those massacres, those bombs, those military actions had been organised or promoted or supported by men inside Italian state institutions and, as has been discovered more recently, by men linked to the structures of United States intelligence.’ (DG p.14)
    The Scandal Spreads Fortuitously for the powers-that-be Andreotti’s revelations coincided with Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait and as a result did not garner the publicity they almost certainly otherwise would have. Even so, the scandal began to spread. In October Greek Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou confirmed there had been a Gladio network in Greece. In Germany a TV programme shocked the nation by revealing how former members of Hitler’s Special Forces SS had been part of a German stay-behind network. The Belgian Parliament appointed a special committee to investigate the existence – confirmed by the defence minister – of a Belgian Gladio network.
    Most sensitively the Belgian parliamentarians discovered that the secretNATO army was still active. They found that a secret meeting of Generals directing the secret stay-behind armies in the numerous countries in Western Europe had been held in the secret NATO-linked Gladio headquarters ACC as recently as October 23 and 24, 1990. The meeting of the ACC had taken place in Brussels under the chairmanship of General Raymond Van Calster, chief of the Belgian military secret service SGR (Service General de Renseignement). (DG p.17)
    In France President Mitterand claimed that the French Gladio network had been dissolved long ago but to his enormous embarrassment Andreotti then claimed the French had taken part in the recent meeting in Brussels. And so it went on. British defence officials refused to comment. In Portugal, contrary to official denials, a retired general confirmed there had been such a network in Portugal, while in Spain former defence minister Alberto Oliart claimed it was childish to
    ask whether also under dictator Franco a secret right-wing army had existed in the country because ‘here Gladio was the government’. (DG p.19)
    In Turkey former prime minister Bulent Ecevit went even further and admitted that a secret army had been involved in torture, massacres, assassinations and coup d’etats. Which prompted the serving defence minister Giray to retort “Ecevit had better keep his fucking mouth shut!” (DG p.20) The EU Debate In all, 12 EU countries were affected and on November 22 1990 the European Parliament debated the issue. The tone was set by Greek parliamentarian Ephremidis:
    ‘Mr. President, the Gladio system has operated for four decades under various names. It has operated clandestinely, and we are entitled to attribute to it all the destabilization, all the provocation and all the terrorism that have occurred in our countries over these four decades, and to say that, actively or passively, it must have had an involvement.’ Ephremidis sharply criticised the entire stay-behind network: ‘The fact that it was set up by the CIA and NATO which, while purporting to defend democracy were actually undermining it and using it for their own nefarious purposes.’ (DG p.21)
    Ganser writes of the EU debate:
    Thereafter, as a first point of criticism following the preamble, the resolution of the EU parliament ‘Condemns the clandestine creation of manipulative and operational networks and calls for a full investigation into the nature, structure, aims and all other aspects of these clandestine organisations or any splinter groups, their use for illegal interference in the internal political affairs of the countries concerned, the problem of terrorism in Europe and the possible collusion of the secret services of Member States or third countries.’ As a second point the EU ‘Protests vigorously at the assumption by certain US military personnel at SHAPE and in NATO of the right to encourage the establishment in Europe of a clandestine intelligence and operation network.’ As a third point the resolution ‘Calls on the governments of the Member States to dismantle all clandestine military and paramilitary networks.’ As a fourth point the EU ‘Calls on the judiciaries of the countries in which the presence of such military organisations has been ascertained to elucidate fully their composition and modus operandi and to clarify any action they may have taken to destabilize the democratic structures of the Member States.’ Furthermore as a fifth point the EU ‘Requests all the Member States to take the necessary measures, if necessary by establishing parliamentary committees of inquiry, to draw up a complete list of organisations active in this field, and at the same time to monitor their links with the respective state intelligence services and their links, if any, with terrorist action groups and/or other illegal practices.’ As a sixth point the EU parliament addresses the EU Council of Ministers, above all in its reunion as Defence Ministers, and ‘Calls on the Council of Ministers to provide full information on the activities of these secret intelligence and operational services.’ As a seventh point, the resolution ‘Calls on its competent committee to consider holding a hearing in order to clarify the role and impact of the “GLADIO” organisation and any similar bodies.’ Last but not least in its final point the resolution explicitly addresses both NATO and the United States, as the EU parliament ‘Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the Council, the Secretary-General of NATO, the governments of the Member States, and the United States Government.’
    He concludes:
    The dog barked loudly, but it did not bite. Of the eight actions requested by the EU parliament not one was carried out satisfactorily. Only Belgium, Italy andSwitzerland investigated their secret armies with a parliamentary commission, producing a lengthy and detailed public report. (DG pp. 23–24)
    Silence from NATO, CIA & MI6 NATO reacted to these revelations in November 1990 with confusion. Against a background of newspaper headlines typified by the Guardian’s ‘Bombs Used at Bologna came from NATO unit’, spokesmen first denied the stories and then denied the denials by saying it was a subject which couldn’t be discussed on grounds of military secrecy.
    The Portuguese press reported on November 7 a confirmation, NATO secretary General Manfred Woerner was quoted as telling in secret 16 ambassadors of NATO countries,Worner confirmed that the military command of the allied forces – Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) – coordinated the activities of the “Gladio Network”, which had been erected by the secret services in various countries of NATO, through a committee created in 1952. (DG p.27)
    German press confirmed that the so-called Secret Armies were co-ordinated in a special secure wing of NATO HQ in Casteau. Access was via a bank vault type door and papers were circulated with the stamp ‘American Eyes Only.’ The revelations began to mount and a picture emerged of a NATO Clandestine Planning Committee, responsible for the Gladio armies; of protocols which actively protected right-wing extremists from pursuit since they would be useful in anti-Communist activities. The CPC was run by the US with the UK and France as junior partners, with CIA members present at their meetings. Despite numerous revelations from those who took part, the official NATO position was (and is) one of denial. Official CIA response to information requests has been to neither confirm nor deny. In the UK, MI6 was even more cagey, prompting John Simpson on BBC 2’s Newsnight programme in April 1991 to say
    ‘Britain’s role in setting up stay-behinds throughout Europe was absolutely fundamental… it has emerged that other European countries had their own stay-behind armies – Belgium, France, Holland, Spain, Greece, Turkey. Even in neutral Sweden and Switzerland there has been public debate. And in some cases enquiries have been set up. Yet in Britain, there is nothing.Save the customary comment of the ministry of defence that they don’t discuss matters of national security.’ (DG p.36)
    Paradoxically, despite the secrecy, an exhibition at the Imperial War Museum tacitly admitted the existence of the stay behind networks, and subsequent to this, two former Royal Marine officers admitted to having spent time at Fort Monckton near Portsmouth where MI6 and members of the SAS trained foreign gladiators. Precursors The original models for the secret armies had been set up in the UK during WW2 by Section D of MI6. Arms caches were buried in anticipation of a German invasion. Initially, this was a purely domestic affair, but in 1940 with the inception of Special Operations Executive (SOE) the same tactics were taken behind enemy lines throughout occupied Europe. Officially SOE was closed down in 1946 and gave way to a successor – Special Operation (SO) – created under the auspices of MI6 to translate the same networks into resistance in countries overrun by the Soviets. Surviving secret units of the Axis powers were targeted and members of the defeated were sometimes recruited for the new anti-Soviet stay-behind networks.
    As the Gladio scandal erupted in 1990 the British press observed that ‘it is nowclear that the elite Special Air Service regiment (SAS) was up to its neck in the NATO scheme, and functioned, with MI6, as a training arm for guerrilla warfare and sabotage’. Specifically the British press confirmed that ‘an Italian stay-behind unit trained in Britain. The evidence now suggests that it lasted well into the 1980s’, adding ‘it has been proved that the SAS constructed the secret hides where arms were stockpiled in the British sector of West Germany’. Some of the best data on the secret British hand came from the Swiss parliamentary investigation into the secret Swiss stay-behind army P26. ‘British secret services collaborated closely with an armed, undercover Swiss organisation [P26] through a series of covert agreements which formed part of a west European network of “resistance” groups’, the press informed a stunned public in neutral Switzerland. Swiss judge Cornu was given the task to investigate the matter and in his report ‘describes the group’s [P26] collaboration with British secret services as “intense”, with Britain providing valuable know-how. P26 cadres participated regularly in training exercises in Britain, the report says. British advisers – possibly from the SAS – visited secret training establishments in Switzerland.’ Ironically the British knew more about the secret Swiss army than the Swiss government, for ‘The activities of P26, its codes, and the name of the leader of the group, Efrem Cattelan, were known to British intelligence, but the Swiss government was kept in the dark, according to the report. It says that documents giving details about the secret agreements between the British and P26 have never been found.’ Swiss Gladiators during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s trained in Great Britain under British Special Forces instructors. Training, according to Swiss military instructor and alleged Gladio member Alois Hurlimann, also included non- simulated real action operations against IRA activists, probably in Northern Ireland. This Hurlimann carelessly revealed in Switzerland during an English language course conversation hour when in poor English he reported that in May 1984 he had taken part in secret trainings in England which had also included a real, non-simulated assault on an IRA arms depot, in which Hurlimann, fully dressed in battle fatigues, had participated, and in which at least one IRA activist had been killed. (DG p.45)
    John Major’s government continued to peddle the line of not commenting on security matters but headlines continued. Newsnight in April 1991 highlighted the evidence that the Gladio networks had operated politically with subversion of the Left. This was reinforced a year later in three ground-breaking documentaries for the BBC by Allan Frankovich.
    Mainly based on interviews, and focusing almost exclusively on Gladio in Italyand Belgium, Francovich’s BBC documentaries feature in front of the camera such key Gladio players as Licio Gelli, head of the P2, Italian right-wing activist Vincenzo Vinciguerra, Venetian judge and Gladio discoverer Felice Casson, Italian Gladio commander General Gerardo Serravalle, Senator Roger Lallemand, head of the Belgian Parliamentary inquiry into Gladio, Decimo Garau, former Italian instructor at the Sardinian Gladio base, William Colby, former Director of CIA, and Martial Lekeu, former member of the Belgian Gendarmerie to name but a few. ‘The stay-behind effort, in my view, was simply to be sure that if the worst came to worst, if a Communist Party came into power, that there would be some agents there who would tip us off, and tell us what was happening and be around’, Ray Cline, Deputy Director of the CIA from 1962 to 1966, explained for instance in front of Francovich’s camera. ‘It’s not unlikely that some right-wing groups were recruited and made to be stay-behinds because they would indeed have tipped us off if a war were going to begin, so using right-wingers, if you used them not politically, but for intelligence purposes, is o.k.’, Cline went on the record. The papers on the next day in London reported that ‘It was one of those programmes which you imagine will bring down governments, but such is the instant amnesia generated by television you find that in the newspapers the next morning it rates barely a mention. (DG p.50)
    Made in the USA Most people would no doubt be deeply surprised to learn which country became the first target of covert action by the CIA after its inception in 1947. It was Italy. Under the auspices of top secret document NSC 4-A CIA Director Hillenkoetter was empowered to take a range of covert actions to prevent a communist victory in Italy’s forthcoming elections.
    The ‘reason for so great secrecy was altogetherclear’, the official CIA history records, for ‘there were citizens of this country at that time who would have been aghast if they had learned of NSC 4-A’. (DG p.53)
    A year later and another directive, the notorious, NSC 10/2 was passed which authorised the CIA to carry out covert actions anywhere in the world. Covert action was defined as activities
    ‘which are conducted or sponsored by this government against hostileforeign states or groups or in support of friendly foreign states or groups but which are so planned and conducted that any US Government responsibility for them is not evident to unauthorised persons and that if uncovered the US Government can plausibly disclaim any responsibility for them’.
    Specifically this included
    ‘propaganda; economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage,anti-sabotage, demolition, and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance movements, guerrillas and refugee liberation groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world’. (DG p.54)
    Even though the definition seemed to include everything imaginable – including activities in countries of the ‘free world’ – Hillenkoetter’s successor claimed that by 1951 the CIA covert ops had already ‘far exceeded’ even this. Gladio-orchestrated coups in Italy. One reason the US focussed such attention on Italy was the country had become an ideological battleground between left and right after the Second World War. The communist party was popular and strong and ranged against it on the right stood an ad hoc coalition of the Italian military secret service, right wing extremists as well as the Mafia and the CIA. Much of the wartime fascist bureaucracy survived, with the support of the US. Most notoriously, Prince Valerio Borghese (whose partisan army had killed hundreds of communists during the war), was saved from execution by the protection of the US. Such was the American determination that Italy should not go communist that President Truman signed a top secret order in 1950 which explicitly included invasion of Italy as an option if the country should turn red. In April 1963 the socialists and communists did well in the polls, with members of the socialist party given cabinet posts but the success was short-lived. The following November Kennedy was assassinated and five months later the Italian socialists were forced out of office by a right-wing coup orchestrated by the CIA and Gladio units.
    Code-named ‘Piano Solo’ the coup was directed by General Giovanni DeLorenzo whom Defence Minister Giulio Andreotti of the DCI had transferred from chief of SIFAR to chief of the Italian paramilitary police, the Carabinieri. In close cooperation with CIA secret warfare expert Vernon Walters, William Harvey, chief of the CIA station in Rome, and Renzo Rocca, Director of the Gladio units within the military secret service SID, De Lorenzo escalated the secret war. Rocca first used his secret Gladio army to bomb the offices of the DCI and the offices of a few daily newspapers and thereafter blamed the terror on the left in order to discredit both Communists and Socialists.47 As the government was not shaken, De Lorenzo in Rome on March 25, 1964 instructed his secret soldiers that upon his signal they were to ‘occupy government offices, the most important communication centres, the headquarters of the leftist parties and the seats of the newspapers closest to the left, as well as the radio and television centres. Newspaper agencies were to be occupied strictly for the time only that it takes to destroy the printing machines and to generally make the publication of newspapers impossible.’48 De Lorenzo insisted that the operation had to be carried out with ‘maximum energy and decisiveness, free of any doubts or indecisiveness’ and, as the Gladio investigation put it, made his men ‘feverish and biting’.49 The Gladiators equipped with proscription lists naming several hundred persons had the explicit order to track down designated Socialists and Communists, arrest and deport them to the island of Sardinia where the secret Gladio centre was to serve as a prison. The document on ‘The Special Forces of SIFAR and Operation Gladio’ had specified that ‘As for the operating headquarters, the Saboteur’s Training CAG is being protected by a particularly sensitive security system and equipped with installations and equipment designed to be useful in case of an emergency.’50 In an atmosphere of greatest tension the secret army was ready to start the coup. Then, on June 14, 1964, De Lorenzo gave the go-ahead 71and with his troops entered Rome with tanks, armoured personnel carriers, jeeps and grenade launchers while NATO forces staged a large military manoeuvre in the area to intimidate the Italian government. Cunningly the General claimed that the show of muscle was taking place on the eve of the 150th anniversary of the founding of the Carabinieri and, together with feverishly anti-Communist Italian President Antonio Segni of the right-wing of the DCI, saluted the troops with a smile. The Italian Socialists noted that somewhat unusually for a parade the tanks and grenade launchers were not withdrawn after the show but stayed in Rome during May and most of June 1964 . (DG p.72)
    A second CIA-backed right-wing coup, code-named Tora-Tora,, was planned for December 1970 but was called off at the last minute. Reportedly, the phone call that aborted it came from President Nixon himself. As a consequence, the Left continued to gain ground in Italy. Foreign secretary Aldo Moro together with president Giovanni Leone flew to the US but were told by Kissinger that on no account should the Left be included in government. Aldo Moro’s wife Eleonora later testified that the words used to her husband were, “You must abandon your policy of bringing all the political forces in your country into direct collaboration. Either you give this up or you will pay dearly for it.\'” (DG p.79) Subsequently Moro was kidnapped and murdered. The Senate commission investigating Gladio and the terrorist bombings suspected the CIA and the Italian military secret service to have organised the abduction and murder of Moro. It therefore reopened the case but found that almost all files on the Moro kidnapping and murder had mysteriously disappeared from the archives of the Ministry of the Interior. The final 370-page report of the commission concluded in 1995 that, ‘It emerges without the shadow of a doubt that elements of the CIA started in the second half of the 1960s a massive operation in order to counter by the use of all means the spreading of groups and movements of the left on a European level.’ However these words were not strong enough for some Senators who continued the investigation under the chairmanship of Senator Pellegrini and concluded in June 2000 that
    ‘those massacres, those bombs, those military actions had been organized or promoted or supported by men inside Italian state institutions and, as has been discovered more recently, by men linked to the structures of United States intelligence. (DG p.82)
    Ganser continues his inquiry with an exhaustive but depressingly familiar account of the same anti-democratic crimes being played out in the other countries of Western Europe, both within and without NATO, namely: France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, The Netherlands, Luxemburg, Denmark, Norway, Germany, Greece and Turkey. Prudent precaution or Source of Terror? At the end of his book, Ganser asks this question in an attempt to draw out the historical lessons. The answer is of course both. The strategic need for the stay-behind armies was reasonable in the light of what was known at the time, but the excesses directed against the people and democratic institutions of the host countries amounted to a wholly unacceptable assault on the sovereignty of these countries, of a sort that was familiar in Warsaw Pact countries but which was assumed to be absent from NATO countries. The terrorist bombings proved to be a means by which Pentagon planners were able to take their own (imaginary or delusional) fears about the rise of the Left and turn them into very real and concrete fears for the populace. The swiftness with which the fear of Communism has since been transmuted following the end of the Cold War into a fear of Islamic terrorism, along with the arrival of the whole security-military- industrial-complex paraphernalia of the ‘War on Terror’ illustrates that this is almost a modus operandi of military planners. It’s as if they can’t help themselves. In light of this information, there is now a vast army of people around the world who reject the official government narrative of what happened on 9/11 and suspect there may have been US government complicity in the attacks. Opponents cry out that such a thing is unthinkable and that ‘they’ would never do such a thing. But as Ganser’s meticulously footnoted history of the Gladio armies makes clear: it may be unthinkable but it certainly isn’t unprecedented. Ganser’s Conclusion in full: CONCLUSION
    ‘Prudent Precaution or source of Terror?’ the international press pointedly askedwhen the secret stay-behind armies of NATO were discovered across Western Europe following the Gladio revelations in Italy in late 1990. After more than ten years of research and investigation the answer is now clear: Both. The secret stay-behind armies of NATO were a prudent precaution, as the available documents and testimonies amply demonstrate. Based on the experiences of the Second World War and the rapid and traumatic occupation of most European countries by the German and Italian forces, military experts feared the Soviet Union and became convinced that a stay-behind army could be of strategic value when it came to the liberation of the occupied territory. Behind enemy lines the secret army could have strengthened the resistance spirit of the population, helped in the running of an organised and armed national resistance, sabotaged and harassed the occupying forces, exfiltrated shot down pilots, and gathered intelligence for the government in exile. Based on the fear of a potential invasion after the Second World War highly placed officials in the national European governments, in the European military secret services, in NATO as well as in the CIA and the MI6 therefore decided that a secret resistance network had to be set up already during peacetime. On a lower level in the hierarchy citizens and military officers in numerous countries of Western Europe shared this assessment, joined the conspiracy and secretly trained for the emergency. These preparations were not limited to the 16 NATO member countries, but included also the four neutral countries in Western Europe, namely Austria, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland, on which the author is preparing a second publication. In retrospect it has become obvious that the fear was without reason and the training had been futile for the invasion of the Red Army never came. Yet such a certainty was not available at the time. And it is telling that the cover of the network, despite repeated exposures in many countries during the entire Cold War, was only blown completely at exactly the same moment when the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union collapsed. The secret stay-behind armies of NATO, however, were also a source of terror, as the evidence available now shows. It has been this second feature of the secret war that has attracted a lot of attention and criticism in the last decade, and which in the future will need more investigation and research. As of now the evidence indicates that the governments of the United States and Great Britain after the end of the Second World War feared not only a Soviet invasion, but also the Communist Parties, and to a lesser degree the Socialist Parties. The White House and Downing Street feared that in several countries of Western Europe, and above all in Italy, France, Belgium, Finland and Greece, the Communists might reach positions of influence in the executive and destroy the military alliance NATO from within by betraying military secrets to the Soviet Union. It was in this sense that the Pentagon in Washington together with the CIA, MI6 and NATO in a secret war set up and operated the stay-behind armies as an instrument to manipulate and control the democracies of Western Europe from within, unknown to both European populations and parliaments. This strategy lead to terror and fear, as well as to “humiliation and maltreatment of democratic institutions’, as the European press correctly criticised. Experts of the Cold War will note that Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind armies cast a new light on the question of sovereignty in Western Europe. It is now clear that as the Cold War divided Europe, brutality and terror was employed to control populations on both sides of the Iron Curtain. As far as Eastern Europe is concerned, this fact has long been recognised, long before it had been openly declared. After the Red Army had in 1968 mercilessly crushed the social reforms in Prag, Soviet leader Leonid Breschnew in Moscow with his infamous ‘Breschnew doctrine’ had openly declared that the countries of Eastern Europe were only allowed to enjoy ‘limited sovereignty’. As far as Western Europe is concerned the conviction of being sovereign and independent was shattered more recently. The data from Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind armies indicates a more subtle and hidden strategy to manipulate and limit the sovereignty, with great differences from country to country. Yet a limitation of sovereignty it was. And in each case where the stay-behind network in the absence of a Soviet invasion functioned as a straightjacket for the democracies of Western Europe, Operation Gladio was the Breschnew doctrine of Washington. The strategic rationale to protect NATO from within cannot be brushed aside lightly. But the manipulation of the democracies of Western Europe by Washington and London on a level which many in the European Union still today find difficult to believe clearly violated the rule of law and will require further debate and investigation. In some operations the secret stay-behind soldiers together with the secret military services monitored and filed left-wing politicians and spread anti-Communist propaganda. In more violent operations the secret war led to bloodshed. Tragically the secret warriors linked up with right-wing terrorists, a combination that led – in some countries including at least Belgium, Italy, France, Portugal, Spain, Greece and Turkey – to massacres, torture, coup d’etats and other violent acts. Most of these state-sponsored terrorist operations, as the subsequent cover-ups and fake trials suggest, enjoyed the encouragement and protection of selected highly placed governmental and military officials in Europe and in the United States. Members of the security apparatus and the government on both sides of the Atlantic who themselves despise being linked up with right-wing terrorism must in the future bring more clarity nd understanding into these tragic dimensions of the secret Cold War in Western Europe. If Cold War experts will derive new data from NATO’s stay-behind network for their discourse on limited sovereignty during the Cold War, then international legal experts and analysts of dysfunctions of democracies will find data on the breakdown of checks and balances within each nation. The Gladio data indicates that the legislative was unable to control the more hidden branches of the executive, and that parliamentary control of secret services is often non-existing or dysfunctional in democracies on both sides of the Atlantic. Totalitarian states have long been known to have operated a great variety of largely uncontrolled and unaccountable secret services and secret armies. Yet to discover such serious dysfunctions also in numerous democracies comes as a great surprise, to say the least. Within this debate of checks and balances military officials have been correct to point out after the discovery of Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind network that there can never be such a thing as a ‘transparent stay-behind army’, for such a network would be exposed immediately in case of invasion and its members would be killed by the invasion force. Parliamentarians and constitutional lawyers meanwhile have been equally correct to emphasise that both the armed forces and the secret services of a democracy must at all times be transparent, accountable, controlled and supervised closely by civilian representatives of the people as they represent the most powerful instruments of the state. This clash between mandatory secrecy and mandatory transparency, which lies at the heart of the Gladio phenomenon, directly points to the more general question of how much secrecy should be granted to the executive branch of a democracy. Judged from the Gladio evidence, where a lack of transparency and accountability has lead to corruption, abuse and terror, the answer is clear: The executive should be granted no secrecy and should at all times be controlled by the legislative. For a secret government, as it manifested itself in the United States and parts of Western Europe, can lead to abuse and even state terrorism. The growth of Intelligence abuses reflects a more general failure of our basic institutions’, US Senator Frank Church had wisely noted after a detailed investigation of CIA covert operations already in the 1970s. Gladio repeats this warning with a vengance. It can hardly be overemphasised that running a secret army and funding an unaccountable intelligence service entails grave risks every democracy should seek to avoid. For the risks do not only include uncontrolled violence against groups of citizens, but mass manipulation of entire countries or continents. Among the most far-reaching findings on the secret war, as seen in the analysis, ranges the fact that the stay-behind network had served as a tool to spread fear amongst the population also in the absence of an invasion. The secret armies in some cases functioned as an almost perfect manipulation system that transported the fears of high-ranking military officers in the Pentagon and NATO to the populations in Western Europe. European citizens, as the strategists in the Pentagon saw it, due to their limited vision were unable to perceive the real and present danger of Communism, and therefore they had to be manipulated. By killing innocent citizens on market squares or in supermarkets and blaming the crime on the Communists the secret armies together with convinced right-wing terrorists effectively translated the fears of Pentagon strategists into very real fears of European citizens. The destructive spiral of manipulation, fear and violence did not end with the fall of the Soviet Union and the discovery of the secret armies in 1990, but on the contrary gained momentum. Ever since the vicious terrorist attacks on the population of the United States on September 11, 2001 and the beginning of the ‘War on Terrorism’ fear and violence dominate not only the headlines across the globe but also the consciousness of millions. In the West the ‘evil Communist’ of the Cold War era has swiftly been replaced with the ‘evil Islamist’ of the war on terrorism era. With almost 3,000 civilians killed on September 11, and several thousands killed in the US-led war on terrorism so far with no end in sight, a new level of brutality has been reached. Such an environment of fear, as the Gladio evidence shows, is ideally suited to manipulate the masses on both sides into more radical positions. Osama Bin Laden and his Al Qaida terror network manipulated millions of Muslims, above all young male adults, to take up a radical position and believe in violence. On the other side also the White House and the administration of George Bush junior has fuelled the spiral of violence and fear and lead millions of Christians and seculars in the United States and in Europe to believe in the necessity and justice of killing other human beings in order to enhance their own security. Yet human security is not being advanced, but on the contrary decays, as the atmosphere is drenched with manipulation, violence and fear. Where the manipulation and the violence originate from and where they lead to, is at times very difficult to dissect. Hitler and the Nazis had profited greatly from manipulation and the fear in the wake of the mysterious Reichstagsbrand in Berlin in 1933, whereupon the Third Reich and Second World War followed. In 2001 the war on terrorism began, and once again radical critics have argued that the White House had manipulated 9/11, the largest terrorist attack in history, for geostrategic purposes. As people across the globe share a vague sensation ‘that it cannot go on like that’ many search for an exit strategy from the spiral of violence, fear and manipulation. In Europe a consensus is building that terrorism cannot be defeated by war, as the latter feeds the spiral of violence, and hence the war on terrorism is not part of the solution but part of the problem. Furthermore also more high-tech – from retina scanning to smart containers – seems unable to really protect potential targets from terror attacks. More technology might even increase the challenges ahead when exploited for terrorist purposes and asymmetric warfare, a development observable ever since the invention of dynamite in the nineteenth century. Arguably more technology and more violence will therefore not solve the challenges ahead. A potential exit strategy from the spiral of fear, manipulation and violence might have to focus on the individual human being itself and a change of consciousness. Given its free will the individual can decide to focus on non-violent solutions of given problems and promote a dialogue of understanding and forgiveness in order to reduce extremist positions. The individual can break free from fear and manipulation by consciously concentrating on his or her very own feelings, thoughts, words and actions, and by focusing all of them on peaceful solutions. As more secrecy and more bloodshed are unlikely to solve the problems ahead the new millennium seems a particularly adequate time to begin with such a shift in consciousness which can have positive effects both for the world and for oneself.
    Related Documents Title Type Publication date Author(s) Description 1980 Massacre in Bologna article 6 July 2005 Thierry Meyssan File:Gladiodocs.pdf WikiSpooks Page 2012 Tom Secker Nato’s Secret Armies Daniele Ganser Operation Gladio article 1999 David Guyatt How European extreme left-wing organisations were manipulated and set up as patsies for indiscriminate acts of terrorism aimed at discrediting the Left and preventing the accession of Left-leaning and communist to government Strategy of Tension: The Case of Italy WikiSpooks Page 28 July 2011 Claudio Celani File:The CIA in Western Europe and the Abuse of Human Rights.pdf WikiSpooks Page Daniele Ganser The use of terrorism to construct world order paper 10 September 2004 Ola Tunander See Also Nato’s Secret Armies – Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe Document:Strategy of Tension: The Case of Italy – A reproduction of a page from Executive Intelligence Review by Claudio Celani dated 2011-07-02 CIA – A paper by Daniele Ganser Operation Gladio – A paper by David Guyatt Document:1980 Massacre in Bologna – An article by Thierry Meyssan dated 6 July 2005 Operation Gladio – Wikipedia Page $100,000,000 to Crack A Lone Nut? – Radio show with an interview with Daniele Ganser on Operation Gladio Categories: <a title="Category:Terrorism" h

Comments are closed.