LIBYA 360°



The Consolidation of the Mexican Narco-State

Uninvestigated After 50 Years: Did the US Incite the 1965 Indonesia Massacre?

Bloodshed Rampant in Mexico as Washington Wages its Secret War

Honduras Bleeding : The Coup and Its Aftermath

Disaster Capitalism and Outrage in Post-Coup Honduras

From Africa, Middle East, Latin America to Ukraine – Snowden & Human Rights : Theatre vs Reality

By Tortilla Con Sal

Recent legislative theatricals in the US Congress once again brought the issue of mass surveillance into the corporate media headlines and with it the continuing hype around Edward Snowden. Ever since Snowden made his revelations, his supporters have claimed his actions constitute a heroic defence of fundamental civil rights in the United States and countries of the European Union.

The latest corporate media reports argue that Snowden has been largely responsible for a major change in Western country legislation defending fundamental civil rights. But the reality behind this extraordinary campaign of exaggeration and illusion looks very different in the light of actual events and a critical look at their media diffusion.

Whatever Edward Snowden’s own intentions may have been, his revelations have been exploited by the psychological warfare apparatus of the United States government and its allies. The media and political management of his revelations have helped the US government consolidate and legitimize existing covert mass surveillance practices in the United States and overseas.

USA Today reported on June 2nd, “The Senate overwhelmingly voted Tuesday to end the controversial bulk collection of the phone data of millions of Americans who have no ties to terrorism.” The USA Today report included a tweet from President Obama “Glad the Senate finally passed the USA Freedom Act. It protects civil liberties and our national security. I’ll sign it as soon as I get it.”

However, Barack Obama has prosecuted more whistleblowers than any President before him. So it seems rational to infer that he will sign off on what is nothing more than a procedural administrative tweak. Let’s face it: substantially, it changes nothing. Even the New York Times reported the day before the vote “Even if Congress ultimately restricts domestic surveillance, it will leave intact the vast majority of the post-Sept. 11 programs authorized by two presidents.

Numerous writers have correctly noted that the new law merely places the formality of a routine administrative procedure – the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) tribunal – between the US government’s spies and the mass data they previously collected unhindered. The corporate media and non-governmental Edward Snowden industry spin this as a vindication of Snowden’s revelations.

But Edward Snowden’s support network is almost completely compromised, one way or another, by most of its members’ relations with the the political and corporate establishment of the US and its NATO allies. For example, film-maker Laura Poitras in 2012 received a US$500,000 fellowship from the MacArthur Foundation, whose then President Robert Gallucci was previously a very high level strategic adviser to the US government.

Glenn Greenwald has been the main proselytizer managing what in many ways is a Snowden cult. Greenwald moved swiftly from his work managing Edward Snowden’s material for the Guardian to working for billionaire Pierre Omidyaar, whose own business empire has corporate links to the US government intelligence network, in particular Booz Allen Hamilton, for whom Snowden used to work.

Edward Snowden himself is an espionage professional, so what he says or does should certainly not be taken at face value. That said, it does seem clear that far from having radical progressive politics he is very much a US patriot with staunch libertarian views, not at all opposed to US foreign policy as such.

While the North American and European progressives who promote Edward Snowden congratulate themselves on their commitment to human rights, almost everywhere else in the world their human rights agenda has been made to look hollow, self-serving and hypocritical. The psy-warfare exploitation of Edward Snowden’s revelations categorically confirms the truism that human rights concerns derive from political, not humanitarian concerns, as events in Palestine, Libya, Syria, Ukraine demonstrate

In Libya, among many other even more extreme examples, hundreds of former officials of the Libyan Jamahiriya have been tortured and abused prior to the sinister farce of judicial process under the control of ISIL terrorists who make a mockery of Islam. Those Libyans, including Saif Gaddhafi, face the death sentence. But Western human rights advocates have nothing to say about these phony trials or their governments’ destruction of Libya because they were cheerleaders for it.

In Palestine, the UN General Secretary has just decided not to include the Israeli government on the list of governments harming children through armed conflict, despite overwhelming evidence including the repeated genocidal massacres in Gaza. Western human rights advocates tend to play down this kind of shameful, indefensible decision and other examples like it, because they fear zionist accusations of “anti-semitism”.

In Ukraine, the fascist regime there has overseen the murder of dozens of journalists, like Oles Buzyna, and anti-regime activists like Oleg Kalashnikov under cover of almost complete silence from the US government and its European Union allies. Western human rights organizations too have next-to-nothing to say beyond ritual denunciations because they are reluctant to seem “pro-Russian”.

In Syria, as in Libya, Western human rights organizations and liberal and progressive NATO country media outlets have vociferously promoted one falsehood after another, that government military arbitrarily murdered large numbers of “peaceful demonstrators”, that “Assad” used chemical weapons in Ghouta or that “Assad” deliberately targets civilians.

It is hard to believe mere coincidence leads the same corporate media and human rights networks to promote Edward Snowden’s revelations ostensibly against government policy, alongside the propaganda line of those same governments targeting Syria, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, Russia and China and so on. That only adds up if one goes to sleep each night listening to the fairy tale of “objective reporting” as read by the BBC or CBS, or Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch – an organization funded (and founded) by George Soros, the same man who destabilized the Ukraine and is a close associate to President Petró Poroshenko.

Edward Snowden’s revelations can be looked at in any number of ways, some more plausible than others. A credible view on the available evidence to date is that the material he has made available has been managed to legitimize long standing covert practice by Western intelligence gathering agencies while also providing a handy human rights and democracy alibi to Western media.

Western government support for their corporate oligarchies following the crash of 2008 compounded Western media embarrassment at their governments’ well-documented human rights abuses, from Iraq and Afghanistan, to Guantanamo and the US corporate industrial penal system. The Snowden revelations have been exploited by Western corporate media so as to offer a theatrical human rights and democracy distraction from past and current crimes by the US government and its NATO allies.

Those governments are guilty of murdering many hundreds of thousands of civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Ivory Coast and Libya, as well as more current support for genocidal Nazi militias in Ukraine and for takfiri terrorists across the Arab world and Central Asia. Not surprisingly, they are also determined enemies of the emancipatory processes of change in Latin America and the Caribbean, targeting especially the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela.

Now the same corporate media and human rights networks that attack Venezuela and its allies are falsely reporting, with all the unison of an accomplished choir, an important civil rights victory thanks to Edward Snowden. That should give decisive pause for thought, because by now few will disagree that the underlying reality of the management of Edward Snowden’s revelations is very different from their superficial appearance.

Psy-warfare and NATO Country Terrorism – Ukraine, Venezuela, Snowden
Snowden: Overlooking the Obvious
Snowden Revisited
Inculcating Stupidity: Syria and Edward Snowden
Reflections on the category “journalism” and the revelations by Edward Snowden
Snowden: Behind NATO’s propaganda outlet for progressives – the Guardian’s board members
Mr. Snowden, It’s Time to Come Out and Take a Stand Publicly as to Your Intentions
The Risks of Trusting the Snowden Story

Ukraine : Sabotage, Terrorism Have Been Part of the CIA Playbook for Over 60 Years

By Wayne Madsen

No sooner had U.S. and Soviet troops shook hands and embraced at Torgau on the River Elbe at the close of World War II in Germany, the forerunner of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), was already lining up the support of Ukrainian allies of Nazi Germany to target the Soviet government in Kiev. The details of the establishment by the OSS of an anti-Soviet infrastructure that included Ukrainian Insurgent Army (OUN) followers of Adolf Hitler ally Stepan Bandera are contained in a formerly «SECRET CONTROL» document from October 1946. The document was prepared by U.S. Army Intelligence (G2) on behalf of the OSS. The following year, the OSS officially was transformed into the CIA.

The report, titled «The Ukrainian Nationalist Movement: An Interim Study», was prepared by William Holzmann and Zolt Aradi. Little is known about the two authors except for the fact that Zolt Aradi also spelled his name «Zsolt» and was born in Hungary and was a Hungarian historian. The authors cited the Ukrainian nationalist movement as a potentially advantageous ally of U.S. anti-Soviet activities: «Whether these groups operate in the homeland or in exile in Europe and the Western hemisphere; whether they are of socialist, democratic, monarchist or fascist persuasion; whether they agree on methods, policies and tactics, or whether they are engaged in internecine, factional struggles, they all stand for an independent Ukrainian state… They are unified only through their concept of Ukrainian independence and in the face of their common enemies».

When one fast forwards to today, the interest of the United States in supporting Ukrainian nationalists, whether they are, like Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, beholden to the World Bank and European bankers; like Right Sector chief Dmytro Yarosh and Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok, linked to the cause of fascism; or like Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky, fervently committed to Zionism, has not changed one iota from 1946. Today, like in 1946, the United States sees Ukrainian nationalists as natural allies to confront Russia.

However, even in 1946, the United States recognized the fact that there were «two Ukraines». Western Ukraine, which had been Polish, was referred to as «Malopolska», or «Little Poland», in the OSS/Army G2 intelligence report while it was stressed that «Eastern Ukraine» once belonged to Czarist Russia. The report also refers to Ukrainians as «Little Russians» and claims they are «closely related» to the «Great Russians».

The report also states that «much of the formative history of Russia took place in the Eastern Ukraine. Kiev, its capital, is the oldest city of Russia, and laden with tradition».

The report further states: «Culturally, the Eastern Ukraine, by virtue of its close ties with Czarist and Soviet Russia, belongs to the Russian orbit, while the Western Ukraine was exposed to Polish and Austro-Hungarian influences. In the Eastern Ukraine, the Russian Orthodox Church is predominant, in the Western Ukraine the Uniate or Greek Catholic Church. National consciousness in naturally strongest in the Western Ukraine».

Even the OSS and U.S. Army intelligence personnel saw that the West’s attempts to counteract the Soviet Union at the end of World War II could only be successful in the Western Ukraine, where the OUN forces under Bandera and his German Nazi allies had been most successful.

The OSS authors of the report recognized that Ukrainian nationalists were split into two camps: «At the outbreak of World War I, the Ukraine and Ukrainians were divided into two parts. The Eastern Ukraine belonged to Russia, and the Western Ukraine [Eastern Galicia] belonged to the Austrian empire which was at war with Russia. Accordingly, the nationalist movements in the Eastern and the Western Ukraine pursued different courses», This is an important admission which has relevancy in today’s discourse on the Western-initiated civil war in Ukraine. The Eastern Ukrainian republics of Donetsk and Lugansk are, according to Western and George Soros-financed propaganda operations, products of the Russian government. However, as stated in the OSS report, eastern Ukrainians have maintained, for at least a hundred years, their own brand of organic Ukrainian nationalism quite distinct from that of western Ukrainians.

The OSS report provided some interesting descriptions of the true nature of Ukrainian nationalism but also proceeded to describe the groups and individuals that American intelligence could rely upon to engage in activities intended to undermine the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in Kiev and the USSR in general. The report describes how Nazi Germany provided early support for the OUN and its clandestine military arm, the Ukrainian Military Organization, or UWO. These radical right-wing Ukrainian nationalists were as much anti-Polish and they were anti-Soviet. The OUN established their headquarters in Berlin and two publications – «Surma» and «Rosbudova Natzi» [Birth of a Nation] — were financially supported by Hitler’s government and Benito Mussolini in Rome. When a delegation of OUN leaders visited Rome, Mussolini presented them with a yellow and blue flag representing the national colors of Ukraine.

The chief of the OUN military branch in Poland was Stepan Bandera, whose «warrior units» in «Danzig, Drohobycz, Lwow, Stanislaw, Brzezeny», and other Polish cities would later provide key support to the Nazi SS units responsible for countless atrocities against Poles, Jews, Roma, and other ethnic and religious groups. In addition to Nazi Germany and fascist Italy, the OUN’s terrorist activities received support from other countries, including the then-independent Baltic republics. Between 1933 and 1934, OUN terrorists assassinated Polish Interior Minister Bronislaw Pieracki; Polish Sejm Deputy H. Holowko; and Alexei Mailov, the Soviet consul in Lvov. Bandera was arrested for the Pieracki murder but others who helped carry them out escaped to Czechoslovakia and were ultimately welcomed in Buenos Aires by the Nazi German Gestapo chief who ran all OUN activities in Argentina, Paraguay, and Uruguay. Pieracki’s murderer, Gregory Maciejko, eventually traveled from Argentina to the United States with a Lithuanian passport. Maciejko, along with Christian Zinsser, the Gestapo chief in Buenos Aires, whose cover was German embassy press attaché, was involved in a plot to assassinate President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Zinsser promised Maciejko one million Reichmarks if he murdered President Roosevelt. The mere fact that individuals like U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland and U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt are now in league with the political and ideological descendants of Ukrainian nationalists who planned to assassinate President Roosevelt in the 1930s should disgust every true and loyal American citizen.

After the fall of fascism in Europe, the OSS report makes it clear that contrivances established by the Nazis, for example, the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, or «ABN», were natural allies for anti-Soviet OSS and later, CIA, activities in the East. In April 1946, the Nazi-era ABN was re-established under the Ukrainian Supreme Liberation Council in Ukraine (UHWR) headed by General Charlton Popov, the wartime head of an anti-Soviet Cossack group in Prague supported by the Gestapo. Under Popov, he ABN was transformed into a group of anti-Soviet nationalist organizations and the OSS and CIA replaced the Gestapo as their chief benefactors. Joining Popov in the ABN’s leadership was Armenian General Shanayan Dro, a British MI-6 intelligence agent who served as an official of the Astro-Romana Oil Company, and anti-Soviet groups from Poland, Belorussia, Lithuania, Latvia, Armenia, Georgia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Turkey, and France. Because of its extensive network in Latin America, the OUN was able to assist in the exfiltration from Yugoslavia of Croatian Nazi Ustashe leader Ante Pavelic to Argentina at the end of the war. These clandestine units served as a major basis for the later creation by the CIA of the Gladio «stay behind» network of Western and Eastern European fascist terrorists.

Ukrainian Nazi collaborators took up residence in such far-flung places as Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston, Munich, Jersey City, Frankfurt, Paris, Detroit, New York, Vienna, Rome, Bern, Buenos Aires, and Sao Paulo. When the Euromaidan uprising succeeded in overthrowing Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in a coup, the family and ideological heirs of the post-war OSS- and CIA-supported Ukrainian Nazi collaborators celebrated as much among the Ukrainian nationalist groups of the U.S., Canada, and Latin America as they did in the neo-Nazi meeting halls of Right Sector and Svoboda in Kiev, Lvov, and other Ukrainian towns and cities.


Plan Condor : There are Military Bases and Media Bases in Latin America

Latin America faces a “Communicational Plan Condor”

Interview with Fernando Buen Abad
By Hector Bernardo


In our 21st century there have been five coup in Latin America in which the battering ram has been the monopolist media structures. This is a warning that we are arriving late.


In the case of SIP I try not to exaggerate its role although it deals with an alliance of media entrepreneurs. The problem is not that they organize; the problem is that they have a mark and curriculum of an anthology of terror. Each is a Summary of horrific horrors, not only for the individual but for the media they represent and the projects they have in mind. Nonetheless I believe that they are a lesser evil regarding another problem that is the mega world Project of media domination that is the imperial project. In this context SIP is merely a pawn that does horrible things but that are only part of this mega project.

I say this to understand the size of SIP but in its scale those authors who form the enormous campaign. They are the battering ram of a project that we have named the Communicational Condor Plan.


In recent years there was a “metastasis” of military bases in Latin America that have been scholarly studied by Atilio Boron and Ana Esther Ceceña detailing the map of military bases in the region. The United States, that always considered Mexico as part of the ring of security now wants that role shifted to the continent which is also, a territory of security with 500 million persons held captive to broaden its market Project.

A form of controlling all kinds of resistance is through the capacity of rapid deployment of military forces in the region. We saw this formula in Iraq and now in Libya, in Syria in the Ukraine. The spear of this battering ram is the media. It begins by accusing dictators there to convince the world that “something has to be done” and the day that that happens the world will applaud and say: “At last they got rid of the dictator”. We have already seen this formula. This formula now targeting Nicolás Maduro and that was aimed at Hugo Chávez. It is the spear aimed at Evo Morales, at Daniel Ortega, at Rafael Correa at Raúl Castro, at Dilma Rousseff and Cristina Fernández. It is clear that they are their enemies in this scenario. [4]Foto: Luis Ferraris


The mass media are really weapons of ideological warfare and have been gaining positions in the continent. In Latin America there are military bases and media bases. The media bases have several advantages over all the others. They have a larger capacity of articulating, rapidly and placing. They explode a defamatory comment on Venezuela and that same morning in a barrio of Buenos Aires they are repeating it setting into motion in this manner the agenda in the territory and at the same time the Grupo Prisa of Spain releases the note in Madrid, CNN reproduces it in the United States; in Mexico it is released by Televisa and Clarín assumes it theirs in Argentina. In other words, there is a speed and synchronism typical of military strategy. There is a territorial struggle that is also a semantic struggle. This is what we call the Communicational Plan Condor because now the forces of communicational repression have a capacity for virulence and very rapid coordination.

I just returned from visiting a city called Azul and while breakfasting in the hotel the lady waiting on my table commented that she was very concerned because she saw that “the Russians have gone back to the devil” and that “Putin is a Satan that threatens the world”. This lady that worked in this humble hotel already had an ideological charge in synchrony with what is being said in a large part of the planet. That Communicational Plan Condor that has managed a position in the imaginary collective soil.


I am sure that if we had large funds and strong institutions to investigate we would find the semantic and syntaxes structures intact.

One of the ones I have worked on is the following, when Peña Nieto won the elections in Mexico. He said: “We have planted a seed that will grow into a tree from which we will have its fruits”. That is the same phrase that Henrique Capriles used in Venezuela when he lost the election to Hugo Chávez and, also in Argentina, in Tigre, Sergio Massa, said the same phrase exactly in his speeches: “We are planting a seed that will grow to be a tree and from which we will have its fruits”.

If we could make a “cat scan” of the speech being spread in Latin America through these continental media bases we would observe that there are stencils that are oriented and that pass by the Random Group of Colombia, by CNN in the States and that come from the Prisa Group, the most powerful center of laboratories of ideological and psychological warfare in the world.

Fernando Buen Abad is a doctor of philosophy and semantics, writer and specialist on the Communication media. He was the consultant of several presidents that include Hugo Chávez and Manuel Zelaya.

Source: Diario Contexto
Translation: Cuba-Network in Defense of Humanity

Read More About Operation Condor >>

“En América Latina hay bases militares y bases mediáticas”

ENTREVISTA a Fernando Buen Abad. El filósofo mexicano analiza la actualidad de los medios en la región. Afirma que las bases mediáticas son más peligrosas y efectivas que las bases militares. América Latina frente a un “Plan Cóndor Comunicacional”.


Por Héctor Bernardo

Fernando Buen Abad es doctor en filosofía, semiólogo, escritor, especialista en medios de comunicación. Ha sido fuente de consulta de varios presidentes, entre ellos Hugo Chávez y Manuel Zelaya. En una extensa charla –que formará parte de un libro sobre pensadores de Nuestra América–, el intelectual de origen mexicano analiza el rol del los medios, afirma que la comunicación es un problema de seguridad regional y asegura que “los medios de comunicación son realmente armas de guerra ideológicas”.

-¿Por qué afirma que en la actualidad la comunicación es un problema de seguridad regional?

-En lo que va del siglo XXI, tenemos ya cinco golpes de Estado en América Latina donde el ariete han sido las estructuras monopólicas mediáticas. Eso es una alerta a la que estamos llegando tarde.

-¿Cuál ha sido el rol de la Sociedad Interamericana de Prensa (SIP) en estos hechos?

-En el caso de la SIP, trato de no exagerar su papel, a pesar de que se trata de una alianza de empresarios de medios. El problema no es que los empresarios se organicen, el problema es que tienen una impronta y una currícula como la de una antología del terror. Cada uno de ellos es un compendio de horrores espantosos, no solamente en lo individual, sino por los medios a los que representa y por los proyectos que tiene en mente. No obstante, creo que siguen siendo una instancia bastante menor respecto del otro problema que es el megaproyecto global de dominación mediática, que sí es un proyecto imperial. En ese contexto, la SIP es apenas un peón que hace cosas horrorosas, pero que conforman sólo una parte de ese megaproyecto.

Digo eso para que ubiquemos el tamaño de lo que representa la SIP; pero, en su escala, quienes la integran son autores de prevenciones enormes. Ellos han sido el ariete del proyecto que hemos denominado como “El Plan Cóndor Comunicacional”.

-¿Qué implicaría El Plan Cóndor Comunicacional?

-En los años recientes hubo una “metástasis” de las bases militares en América Latina, sobre ello han hecho análisis muy precisos Atilio Boron y Ana Esther Ceceña, detallando el mapa de las bases militares en la región. Estados Unidos, que siempre pensó que México era parte de su anillo de seguridad, ahora quiere que lo sea todo el continente, que, además, es un territorio de seguridad con 500 millones de personas cautivas para ampliar su proyecto de mercado.

Una forma de controlar todo tipo de resistencia es mediante las capacidades de desembarco acelerado de fuerzas militares en la región. La formula ya la vimos en Irak, ya la vimos en Libia, en Siria, en Ucrania. El ariete, la punta de lanza de esto, son los medios. Se trata de empezar a acusar de dictadores a todos los que están ahí, convencer al mundo de que “alguien tiene que hacer algo”, y el día que eso pase todo el mundo aplaudirá y dirá: “Por fin ya quitaron a ese dictador”. Esa formula ya la vimos. Esa formula es la que está apuntándole a Nicolás Maduro y que le apuntó a Hugo Chávez. Es la formula que le apunta a Evo Morales, a Daniel Ortega, a Rafael Correa, a Raúl Castro, a Dilma Rousseff y a Cristina Fernández. Está claro quiénes son los enemigos para ellos en este escenario.

-¿Qué rol les corresponde en ese contexto a los medios de comunicación?

-Los medios de comunicación son realmente armas de guerra ideológicas y han ido reposicionándose en el continente. En América Latina hay bases militares y bases mediáticas. Las bases mediáticas tienen varias ventajas sobre las otras. Tiene mayor capacidad de articulación, de manera más rápida y ubicua. Hacen estallar un comentario difamador en Venezuela, esa misma mañana en una radio de un barrio de Buenos Aires la repiten, haciendo operar de esa manera la agenda en el territorio, al mismo tiempo que el Grupo Prisa de España reproduce la misma nota en Madrid, la CNN la reproduce en Estados Unidos, en México la replica Televisa y Clarín hace lo suyo en Argentina. Es decir, hay velocidad y sincronicidad, eso es básicamente estrategia militar. Hay una lucha territorial al mismo tiempo que hay una lucha semántica. A eso es a lo que denomino El Plan Cóndor Comunicacional. Porque ahora las fuerzas de represión comunicacional tienen una capacidad de virulencia y coordinación muy rápida.

Acabo de ir a una ciudad que se llama Azul, y, mientras desayunaba en el hotel, la señora que atendía me comentaba que estaba muy preocupada porque ella veía que “los rusos se han vuelto el demonio” y que “Putin es un Satanás que amenaza a todo el mundo”. Esa señora, que atendía ese humilde hotel, ya tenía la carga ideológica en sincronía con lo que se está diciendo en gran parte del planeta. Ese es El Plan Cóndor Comunicacional, que ya ha hecho la tarea de posicionarse en el terreno del imaginario colectivo.

-¿Cómo estructura?

-Estoy seguro de que si tuviéramos dinero e instituciones fuertes para hacer estas tareas de investigación identificaríamos estructuras semánticas y sintácticas idénticas. Una que he trabajado es la siguiente: cuando ganó las elecciones en México Peña Nieto, dijo “Hemos sembrado una semilla, de la que crecerá un árbol, del que tendremos los frutos”. Esa es la misma frase que dijo en Venezuela Henrique Capriles cuando perdió las elecciones frente a Hugo Chávez, y también en Argentina, en Tigre, Sergio Massa, dijo exactamente la misma frase en uno de sus discursos: “Estamos sembrado una semilla, de la que crecerá un árbol, del que tendremos los frutos”.

Si tuviéramos la posibilidad de hacer una “tomografía computada” del discurso que está corriendo en América Latina en estas bases mediáticas continentales, veríamos que hay matrices que tienen una orientación y que pasan por el Grupo Random de Colombia, por CNN en Estados Unidos y que viene del Grupo Prisa, donde están los laboratorios de guerra ideológica y psicológica más poderosos del mundo.

War, Imperialism and the People’s Struggle in the Middle East and Africa

United States continues its occupation of the region

Author’s Comment: This paper was presented at the Left Forum held at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York (CUNY) during May 29-31, 2015. The panel was chaired by Bill Dores of the International Action Center. Kazem Azin of Solidarity Iran was also a participant.

By Abayomi Azikiwe
Libya 360°

Since March 26 the Saudi Arabian monarchy along with its neighbors in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) has been waging war on the nation of Yemen. Daily bombing raids against residential areas and infrastructure are ostensibly designed to push back the Ansurallah (Houthis) movement which has taken over large sections of the country, one of the most underdeveloped in the region.

This war has been largely hidden from the view of people inside the United States. Nonetheless, this is a U.S. war aimed at maintaining Washington’s dominant position within the Arabian Peninsula extending to the Horn of Africa and the Gulf of Aden.

Prior to the beginning of the airstrikes by the Saudi-GCC Coalition, the administration of President Barack Obama withdrew its diplomatic personnel along with Special Forces operating inside the country. For many years the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has viewed Yemen as a key area for its so-called “war on terrorism.”

Regular drone strikes have killed many Yemenis along with at least three of whom were U.S. citizens. Washington has said that the Al-Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) is major threat to American interests in an attempt to justify the drone attacks which have killed more civilians than supposed “armed combatants.”

However, in recent months the Islamic Republic of Iran has been designated by Washington and its allies as the principal threat in Yemen. The Ansurallah, which is a Shiite branch of Islam, is supported politically by Tehran. The Saudi monarchy views Iran as its major impediment in controlling the region on behalf of U.S. oil and financial interests.

The current hostilities in Yemen have been described as a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and the GCC on one side and Iran and its allies on the other. The total war strategy against Yemen consists of the banning of humanitarian assistance from Iran and others who oppose the bombing and ground offensive by militias which are financed by Riyadh.

According to an article published by the Telegraph in Britain, it says that “As Saudi Arabia has maintained an air and naval blockade on Yemeni territory, gas supplies have run perilously low. Even a five day humanitarian pause was not enough to bring in the necessary aid. Fuel prices have spiked as the casualty count mounts, and some hospitals have been forced to close altogether because they are unable to keep medical supplies refrigerated or perform operations since they can’t run backup generators.”

Reports of the number of Yemenis killed in the fighting range from 2,000-4,000 with many more injured and displaced. Yemeni-Americans who have been attempting to leave the country since late March have been abandoned by Washington.

Many Yeminis have taken refuge across the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden into Djibouti where the U.S. has its largest military base in Africa. The U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) is expanding its operations at Camp Lemonnier which is utilized as a staging ground for military strikes inside Somalia and other countries on the continent.

This same above-mentioned Telegraph article also notes that “The UNHCR says a total of 5,000 Yemeni refugees have made it to Djibouti, including 3,000 in the capital, Djibouti city, and 1,000 in Obock, 300 kilometers (187 miles) to the north — making it currently the biggest Yemeni refugee population. The influx has hiked up local prices, with markets, hotels, and drivers trying to make the most of the situation in an already struggling economy.”

Yemen and the Imperialist Regional War

The war in Yemen is part and parcel of a broader regional war that encompasses Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, occupied Palestine and Iran. In Iraq where the U.S. occupied the country for over eight years, the Pentagon has redeployed 3,100 troops to the area. These troops are purportedly training Iraqi military forces although the Defense Department cannot claim any real successes.

When Islamic State fighters confronted Iraqi units in Mosul and other cities they fled. A similar situation was reported in Ramadi in Anbar Province. The Obama administration played down these events in order to deflect the attention of the U.S. public away from its failures in Iraq.

The Kurdish fighters seem to have fought with far greater commitment and vigor yet they are not privy to the military assistance in their struggle against IS. Fierce battles in Kobane on the border with Turkey revealed that the Kurds were a force to be reckoned with in the regional war against IS.

In neighboring Syria, the U.S. is behind efforts to destabilize and overthrow the government of President Bashar al-Assad. Since 2011, an estimated 200,000 people have died and several million dislocated both inside and outside of Syria.

The U.S. is bombing both Iraq and Syria under the guise of degrading and destroying IS bases. However, the impact of this aerial war is to create broader avenues of operation for the IS forces which were built up during the initial years of the destabilization campaign against Syria. At present IS military units have seized large areas of territory within Syria and Iraq, while the strategy of the White House is to continue the bombing targeting Daesh but at the same time opposing the continued existence of the Assad government in Damascus.

A massive air assault on Syria was planned for August-September 2013. However, public outrage in Britain and the U.S. stopped the president in his tracks. The effect of recent wars waged by Washington through successive administrations has resulted in greater instability and dislocation.

In Lebanon Hezbollah has maintained its strength against the Zionist regime occupying Palestine. The party and mass movement have also intervened in solidarity with the people of Syria and may escalate its involvement based upon developments taking place inside the country.

The plight of Palestinians has been negatively impacted by the wars in Syria and Iraq. In Syria, many Palestinian refugees were divided over support for the Assad government. A major camp housing Palestinians has been the focal point of IS attacks seeking to gain control of the area.

Israel is supported to the tune of billions every year from the tax dollars of the American people. U.S. warplanes and other defense technology are given to Tel Aviv where it is tested against the people of Gaza and other occupied territories.

Although the U.S. administration has signed an agreement on Iran nuclear energy program, the Obama White House is continuing the 36 years of hostility towards Tehran since the popular revolution of 1979. Washington’s coordination of the Saudi-GCC war in Yemen is a clear testament to the ongoing war against Iran.

Africa and the Middle East

As we mentioned earlier, Djibouti, the pivotal staging ground for AFRICOM on the continent is located right across from Yemen. Somalia, Ethiopia, Egypt and Kenya are in close proximity. The artificial divisions between Africa and the so-called Middle East are merely constructs of colonialism and imperialism for the purpose dividing the regions in regard to spheres of influence for western powers.

Peoples who reside on either side of the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden fundamentally want the U.S. out of their countries. They desire to live in peace and to determine their own destiny in the quest for development and unity. Washington and Wall Street dominate through their military prowess and economic machinations that bribe leaders making them dependent upon U.S. and European patronage and privilege.

The fueled hostility between various branches of Islam is indispensable in the imperialist strategy for the Middle East and Africa. Only when the peoples of Africa and the Middle East unite on an anti-imperialist basis will there be a genuine atmosphere of lasting peace and social stability.

Abayomi Azikiwe has written extensively on African affairs with specific reference to historical studies and political economy. He has done research on the origins and political ideology of the African National Congress, its leaders as well as other national liberation movements and regional organizations  in Southern Africa.

Washington’s Dual Neo-liberal Agenda : Militarization of Central America – Détente with Cuba

Russia and the CIA’s Chechen Wars

By F. William Engdahl

On April 26 Russia’s main national TV station, Rossiya 1, featured President Vladimir Putin in a documentary to the Russian people on the events of the recent period including the annexation of Crimea, the US coup d’etat in Ukraine, and the general state of relations with the United States and the EU. His words were frank. And in the middle of his remarks the Russian former KGB chief dropped a political bombshell that was known by Russian intelligence two decades ago.

Putin stated bluntly that in his view the West would only be content in having a Russia weak, suffering and begging from the West, something clearly the Russian character is not disposed to. Then a short way into his remarks, the Russian President stated for the first time publicly something that Russian intelligence has known for almost two decades but kept silent until now, most probably in hopes of an era of better normalized Russia-US relations.

Putin stated that the terror in Chechnya and in the Russian Caucasus in the early 1990’s was actively backed by the CIA and western Intelligence services to deliberately weaken Russia. He noted that the Russian FSB foreign intelligence had documentation of the US covert role without giving details.

What Putin, an intelligence professional of the highest order, only hinted at in his remarks, I have documented in detail from non-Russian sources. The report has enormous implications to reveal to the world the long-standing hidden agenda of influential circles in Washington to destroy Russia as a functioning sovereign state, an agenda which includes the neo-nazi coup d’etat in Ukraine and severe financial sanction warfare against Moscow. The following is drawn on my book, Amerikas’ Heilige Krieg.

CIA’s Chechen Wars

Not long after the CIA and Saudi Intelligence-financed Mujahideen had devastated Afghanistan at the end of the 1980’s, forcing the exit of the Soviet Army in 1989, and the dissolution of the Soviet Union itself some months later, the CIA began to look at possible places in the collapsing Soviet Union where their trained “Afghan Arabs” could be redeployed to further destabilize Russian influence over the post-Soviet Eurasian space.

They were called Afghan Arabs because they had been recruited from ultraconservative Wahhabite Sunni Muslims from Saudi Arabia, the Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and elsewhere in the Arab world where the ultra-strict Wahhabite Islam was practiced. They were brought to Afghanistan in the early 1980’s by a Saudi CIA recruit who had been sent to Afghanistan named Osama bin Laden.

With the former Soviet Union in total chaos and disarray, George H.W. Bush’s Administration decided to “kick ‘em when they’re down,” a sad error. Washington redeployed their Afghan veteran terrorists to bring chaos and destabilize all of Central Asia, even into the Russian Federation itself, then in a deep and traumatic crisis during the economic collapse of the Yeltsin era.

In the early 1990s, Dick Cheney’s company, Halliburton, had surveyed the offshore oil potentials of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and the entire Caspian Sea Basin. They estimated the region to be “another Saudi Arabia” worth several trillion dollars on today’s market. The US and UK were determined to keep that oil bonanza from Russian control by all means. The first target of Washington was to stage a coup in Azerbaijan against elected president Abulfaz Elchibey to install a President more friendly to a US-controlled Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline, “the world’s most political pipeline,” bringing Baku oil from Azerbaijan through Georgia to Turkey and the Mediterranean.

At that time, the only existing oil pipeline from Baku was a Soviet era Russian pipeline that ran through the Chechen capital, Grozny, taking Baku oil north via Russia’s Dagestan province, and across Chechenya to the Black Sea Russian port of Novorossiysk. The pipeline was the only competition and major obstacle to the very costly alternative route of Washington and the British and US oil majors.

President Bush Sr. gave his old friends at CIA the mandate to destroy that Russian Chechen pipeline and create such chaos in the Caucasus that no Western or Russian company would consider using the Grozny Russian oil pipeline.

Graham E. Fuller, an old colleague of Bush and former Deputy Director of the CIA National Council on Intelligence had been a key architect of the CIA Mujahideen strategy. Fuller described the CIA strategy in the Caucasus in the early 1990s: “The policy of guiding the evolution of Islam and of helping them against our adversaries worked marvelously well in Afghanistan against the Red Army. The same doctrines can still be used to destabilize what remains of Russian power.”6

The CIA used a dirty tricks veteran, General Richard Secord, for the operation. Secord created a CIA front company, MEGA Oil. Secord had been convicted in the 1980s for his central role in the CIA’s Iran-Contra illegal arms and drugs operations.

In 1991 Secord, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, landed in Baku and set up the CIA front company, MEGA Oil. He was a veteran of the CIA covert opium operations in Laos during the Vietnam War. In Azerbaijan, he setup an airline to secretly fly hundreds of bin Laden’s al-Qaeda Mujahideen from Afghanistan into Azerbaijan. By 1993, MEGA Oil had recruited and armed 2,000 Mujahideen, converting Baku into a base for Caucasus-wide Mujahideen terrorist operations.

General Secord’s covert Mujahideen operation in the Caucasus initiated the military coup that toppled elected president Abulfaz Elchibey that year and installed Heydar Aliyev, a more pliable US puppet. A secret Turkish intelligence report leaked to the Sunday Times of London confirmed that “two petrol giants, BP and Amoco, British and American respectively, which together form the AIOC (Azerbaijan International Oil Consortium), are behind the coup d’état.”

Saudi Intelligence head, Turki al-Faisal, arranged that his agent, Osama bin Laden, whom he had sent to Afghanistan at the start of the Afghan war in the early 1980s, would use his Afghan organization Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK) to recruit “Afghan Arabs” for what was rapidly becoming a global Jihad. Bin Laden’s mercenaries were used as shock troops by the Pentagon and CIA to coordinate and support Muslim offensives not only Azerbaijan but also in Chechnya and, later, Bosnia.

Bin Laden brought in another Saudi, Ibn al-Khattab, to become Commander, or Emir of Jihadist Mujahideen in Chechnya (sic!) together with Chechen warlord Shamil Basayev. No matter that Ibn al-Khattab was a Saudi Arab who spoke barely a word of Chechen, let alone, Russian. He knew what Russian soldiers looked like and how to kill them.

Chechnya then was traditionally a predominantly Sufi society, a mild apolitical branch of Islam. Yet the increasing infiltration of the well-financed and well-trained US-sponsored Mujahideen terrorists preaching Jihad or Holy War against Russians transformed the initially reformist Chechen resistance movement. They spread al-Qaeda’s hardline Islamist ideology across the Caucasus. Under Secord’s guidance, Mujahideen terrorist operations had also quickly extended into neighboring Dagestan and Chechnya, turning Baku into a shipping point for Afghan heroin to the Chechen mafia.

From the mid-1990s, bin Laden paid Chechen guerrilla leaders Shamil Basayev and Omar ibn al-Khattab the handsome sum of several million dollars per month, a King’s fortune in economically desolate Chechnya in the 1990s, enabling them to sideline the moderate Chechen majority.21 US intelligence remained deeply involved in the Chechen conflict until the end of the 1990s. According to Yossef Bodansky, then Director of the US Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, Washington was actively involved in “yet another anti-Russian jihad, seeking to support and empower the most virulent anti-Western Islamist forces.”

Bodansky revealed the entire CIA Caucasus strategy in detail in his report, stating that US Government officials participated in,

“a formal meeting in Azerbaijan in December 1999 in which specific programs for the training and equipping of Mujahideen from the Caucasus, Central/South Asia and the Arab world were discussed and agreed upon, culminating in Washington’s tacit encouragement of both Muslim allies (mainly Turkey, Jordan and Saudi Arabia) and US ‘private security companies’. . . to assist the Chechens and their Islamist allies to surge in the spring of 2000 and sustain the ensuing Jihad for a long time…Islamist Jihad in the Caucasus as a way to deprive Russia of a viable pipeline route through spiraling violence and terrorism.”

The most intense phase of the Chechen wars wound down in 2000 only after heavy Russian military action defeated the Islamists. It was a pyrrhic victory, costing a massive toll in human life and destruction of entire cities. The exact death toll from the CIA-instigated Chechen conflict is unknown. Unofficial estimates ranged from 25,000 to 50,000 dead or missing, mostly civilians. Russian casualties were near 11,000 according to the Committee of Soldiers’ Mothers.

The Anglo-American oil majors and the CIA’s operatives were happy. They had what they wanted: their Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan oil pipeline, bypassing Russia’s Grozny pipeline.

The Chechen Jihadists, under the Islamic command of Shamil Basayev, continued guerrilla attacks in and outside Chechnya. The CIA had refocused into the Caucasus.

Basayev’s Saudi Connection

Basayev was a key part of the CIA’s Global Jihad. In 1992, he met Saudi terrorist Ibn al-Khattag in Azerbaijan. From Azerbaijan, Ibn al-Khattab brought Basayev to Afghanistan to meet al-Khattab’s ally, fellow-Saudi Osama bin Laden. Ibn al-Khattab’s role was to recruit Chechen Muslims willing to wage Jihad against Russian forces in Chechnya on behalf of the covert CIA strategy of destabilizing post-Soviet Russia and securing British-US control over Caspian energy.

Once back in Chechnya, Basayev and al-Khattab created the International Islamic Brigade (IIB) with Saudi Intelligence money, approved by the CIA and coordinated through the liaison of Saudi Washington Ambassador and Bush family intimate Prince Bandar bin Sultan. Bandar, Saudi Washington Ambassador for more than two decades, was so intimate with the Bush family that George W. Bush referred to the playboy Saudi Ambassador as “Bandar Bush,” a kind of honorary family member.

Basayev and al-Khattab imported fighters from the Saudi fanatical Wahhabite strain of Sunni Islam into Chechnya. Ibn al-Khattab commanded what were called the “Arab Mujahideen in Chechnya,” his own private army of Arabs, Turks, and other foreign fighters. He was also commissioned to set up paramilitary training camps in the Caucasus Mountains of Chechnya that trained Chechens and Muslims from the North Caucasian Russian republics and from Central Asia.

The Saudi and CIA-financed Islamic International Brigade was responsible not only for terror in Chechnya. They carried out the October 2002 Moscow Dubrovka Theatre hostage seizure and the gruesome September 2004 Beslan school massacre. In 2010, the UN Security Council published the following report on al-Khattab and Basayev’s International Islamic Brigade:

Islamic International Brigade (IIB) was listed on 4 March 2003. . . as being associated with Al-Qaida, Usama bin Laden or the Taliban for “participating in the financing, planning, facilitating, preparing or perpetrating of acts or activities by, in conjunction with, under the name of, on behalf or in support of” Al-Qaida. . . The Islamic International Brigade (IIB) was founded and led by Shamil Salmanovich Basayev (deceased) and is linked to the Riyadus-Salikhin Reconnaissance and Sabotage Battalion of Chechen Martyrs (RSRSBCM). . . and the Special Purpose Islamic Regiment (SPIR). . .

On the evening of 23 October 2002, members of IIB, RSRSBCM and SPIR operated jointly to seize over 800 hostages at Moscow’s Podshipnikov Zavod (Dubrovka) Theater.

In October 1999, emissaries of Basayev and Al-Khattab traveled to Usama bin Laden’s home base in the Afghan province of Kandahar, where Bin Laden agreed to provide substantial military assistance and financial aid, including by making arrangements to send to Chechnya several hundred fighters to fight against Russian troops and perpetrate acts of terrorism. Later that year, Bin Laden sent substantial amounts of money to Basayev, Movsar Barayev (leader of SPIR) and Al-Khattab, which was to be used exclusively for training gunmen, recruiting mercenaries and buying ammunition.

The Afghan-Caucasus Al Qaeda “terrorist railway,” financed by Saudi intelligence, had two goals. One was a Saudi goal to spread fanatical Wahhabite Jihad into the Central Asian region of the former Soviet Union. The second was the CIA’s agenda of destabilizing a then-collapsing post-Soviet Russian Federation.


On September 1, 2004, armed terrorists from Basayev and al-Khattab’s IIB took more than 1,100 people as hostages in a siege that included 777 children, and forced them into School Number One (SNO) in Beslan in North Ossetia, the autonomous republic in the North Caucasus of the Russian Federation near to the Georgia border.

On the third day of the hostage crisis, as explosions were heard inside the school, FSB and other elite Russian troops stormed the building. In the end, at least 334 hostages were killed, including 186 children, with a significant number of people injured and reported missing. It became clear afterward that the Russian forces had handled the intervention poorly.

The Washington propaganda machine, from Radio Free Europe to The New York Times and CNN, wasted no time demonizing Putin and Russia for their bad handling of the Beslan crisis rather than focus on the links of Basayev to Al Qaeda and Saudi intelligence. That would have brought the world’s attention to the intimate relations between the family of then US President George W. Bush and the Saudi billionaire bin Laden family.

On September 1, 2001, just ten days before the day of the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks, Saudi Intelligence head US-educated Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud, who had directed Saudi Intelligence since 1977, including through the entire Osama bin Laden Mujahideen operation in Afghanistan and into the Caucasus, abruptly and inexplicably resigned, just days after having accepted a new term as intelligence head from his King. He gave no explanation. He was quickly reposted to London, away from Washington.

The record of the bin Laden-Bush family intimate ties was buried, in fact entirely deleted on “national security” (sic!) grounds in the official US Commission Report on 911. The Saudi background of fourteen of the nineteen alleged 911 terrorists in New York and Washington was also deleted from the US Government’s final 911 Commission report, released only in July 2004 by the Bush Administration, almost three years after the events.

Basayev claimed credit for having sent the terrorists to Beslan. His demands had included the complete independence of Chechnya from Russia, something that would have given Washington and the Pentagon an enormous strategic dagger in the southern underbelly of the Russian Federation.

By late 2004, in the aftermath of the tragic Beslan drama, President Vladimir Putin reportedly ordered a secret search and destroy mission by Russian intelligence to hunt and kill key leaders of the Caucasus Mujahideen of Basayev. Al-Khattab had been killed in 2002. The Russian security forces soon discovered that most of the Chechen Afghan Arab terrorists had fled. They had gotten safe haven in Turkey, a NATO member; in Azerbaijan, by then almost a NATO Member; or in Germany, a NATO Member; or in Dubai–one of the closest US Allies in the Arab States, and Qatar-another very close US ally. In other words, the Chechen terrorists were given NATO safe haven.

Reflections on Colombia’s “Narco-Paramilitary State”

By Dan Kovalik

In his contribution to the recent report put together by the Historical Commission of the Colombian Armed Conflict and Its Victims (Feb. 2015), one of Colombia’s bravest voices, Father Javier Giraldo, S.J., gives his take on “The Origins of The Armed Conflict, its Persistence and its Impacts.”

Father Giraldo explains that the single biggest factor behind the armed conflict in Colombia is land and its unequal distribution. As he relates, though there have been various initiatives on the part of the Colombian government to redistribute land, these efforts have been a complete failure, with currently 4.2% of the land in Colombia in the hands of 67.6% of the population, while 46.5% of all land is in the hands of a mere .4% of the population. This unequal distribution of land, furthermore, has resulted in Colombia becoming one of the most unequal societies on earth with a Gini coefficient of 885.

While the foregoing may not come as too much of a surprise, what might is Father Giraldo’s observation that the U.S. has contributed to the root cause of the conflict by siding for many decades with the small percent of the Colombia population that owns most of Colombia’s land.
He relates that the U.S. — through various means, including through the DEA and CIA — have supported both the right-wing paramilitaries as well as drug cartels aligned with these paramilitaries in order to foster the unequal distribution of land in Colombia.

Father Giraldo indicates that these narco-paramilitaries — which are rarely spoken of, as contrasted with the so-called “narco-guerillas” — began a massive land grab by massacres and mass displacements of the population since the 1980’s, and continuing to the current time. During the same period, of course, the U.S. supported the internal war on the side of these groups carrying out the displacements. And ironically, the U.S. did so on the basis of fighting so-called narco-guerillas.

In addition, as Father Geraldo explains, between 1997 and 2007 — that is, roughly during the period of Plan Colombia in which the U.S. gave billions of dollars to the Colombian military — the most intense period of AUC paramilitary activity occurred in which nearly 800,000 hectares of land were captured and one million peasants displaced by the paramilitaries. And, these paramilitaries carried out this reverse land reform program with material and logistical support from the U.S.-backed Colombian military.

These conclusions are supported by a recent study of Amnesty International (AI) which evaluates Colombia’s land restitution process. The salient conclusions of this AI Report are as follows:

  • “Almost six million people have been forcibly displaced since 1985, most of them as a consequence of Colombia’s internal armed conflict – that is nearly 13% of country’s population – and means Colombia has one of the highest forced displacement levels in the world.”
  • “It is estimated that some eight million hectares of land have been acquired illegally, equating to 14% of Colombia’s territory.”
  • “The majority of those forcibly displaced have been peasant farmers, Indigenous People and Afro-descendant communities, and their lands are often of economic and political interest to the parties to the conflict.”
  • “Most forced displacement has been carried out by paramilitaries and the [U.S.-backed] security forces, either acting alone or in collusion with each other.”
  • “Land claimants, human rights defenders and state officials involved in the land restitution process have been threatened and killed, mostly by paramilitaries.”
  • “Forty-five percent of forcibly displaced households are headed by women, . . . [and] [f]orcibly displaced women are at far greater risk of being sexually abused, raped or forced into prostitution.”
  • “Since 2012, the Victims and Land Restitution Law (Law 1448) has sought to help return illegally acquired land to some of its rightful occupants. However, only a tiny percentage of the millions of hectares stolen has been returned.”
  • “Impunity is rife. The majority of those suspected of having criminal responsibility for forced displacement and related human rights abuses have never been brought to justice. This impunity has encouraged further forced displacements.”
  • “Very few land restitution cases have tackled land occupation by large national or international companies [many of these U.S. companies] or others who may have been responsible for the forced displacement and dispossession of the claimant. Instead the process has focused on the easy, small-scale cases.”

Father Geraldo attributes such dire statistics to the phenomenon of the “narco-paramilitary state” which he argues is now fully in control of Colombia. He cites a report coordinated by Colombia Senator Alexander Lopez which concluded that “at the beginning of this research in 2008, . . . 264 civil servants, 83 of them Congressmen, had paramilitary ties.” By the end of the publication in April 2010, the figure rose to 400 politicians, of which 102 are Congressmen, as well as 324 members of the security forces. In short, the Colombian state has successfully been co-opted by the paramilitaries for the purpose of taking the best land in Colombia.

And, Father Geraldo traces the rise and dominance of the paramilitaries back to the U.S. National Security Doctrine of President Kennedy which was formulated in response to Vatican II – an initiative which charted a new course for the Catholic Church by encouraging resistance to unjust social systems and to the unfair distribution of goods and land. While the National Security Doctrine was claimed to be about fighting Communism in Latin America, Father Geraldo rightly explains that we know from various journals of the armed forces, reports of high military commanders, as well as manuals from the School of the Americas, that the U.S., and consequently Colombia, have equated trade unionists the peasants, Liberation Theologians, human rights defenders and non-traditional political leaders with Communism, and, therefore, as legitimate military targets of the counter-insurgency.

It is also clear that none of this would have been possible without a compliant U.S. press which barely mentions the word, “Colombia,” and certainly never mentions the U.S.’s decades-long terror campaign against that country.

As Colombia Nears Peace Accord, The Question of U.S. Culpability Looms
Oil, Presidents, Congress, and Cocaine: Plan Colombia
The American Fingerprints on Colombia’s Dead
Understanding the Causes of Colombia’s Conflict
Plan Colombia and US-backed Death Squads
NATO and US Special Services Beachhead in Colombia
FARC-EP : The Army of Colombia, A Pawn of the CIA
Washington Post Colombia Propaganda
FARC-EP Communiqué : The CIA in Colombia
State Terrorism Vs Democracy in Colombia
America’s Covert War in Colombia
Colombia: NATO Partner On Sixth Continent

As Colombia Nears Peace Accord, The Question of U.S. Culpability Looms

By Dan Kovalik

Due to the good journalism of Colombia Reports as well as FAIR, there has been some attention given to the scandal of U. S. military and military contractors sexually assaulting young women and girls in Colombia.

This scandal was ignited by a piece amongst an 800-page joint Colombian government/FARC report on the historical reasons for the conflict in Colombia. In particular, it is based on an article by Renán Vega Cantor, entitled, “Interference of the United States, Counter-Insurgency and State Terrorism.”

As both Colombia Reports and FAIR pointed out, Vega mentions potentially 54 girls who had been raped at the hands of U. S. soldiers and contractors in recent years. However, this appears to be merely the tip of the iceberg. I talked to Gimena Sanchez from the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) who explained to me that in trips to just one region of Colombia (Tumaco), “we were informed of sexual misconduct committed by U. S. contractors, however, none of the women or organizations in the area were willing to report these cases due to fear of reprisals. As such, we do not know the full scope of these abuses, but it is likely to be broader in scope than what has been revealed.”

Truthfully, none of this should come as any surprise given the scandal a few years ago at the Summit of the Americas where 11 U.S. Secret Servicemen were found to have been procuring Colombian prostitutes in Cartagena, and in light of the recent scandal with the DEA in Colombia partying with prostitutes procured by the very drug cartels they were supposed to be fighting.

What’s more, the rape and sexual exploitation of Colombians by powerful Americans is indicative of the much greater problem with U. S. involvement in Colombia over the past century, which, as Vega reports, has stoked the war and the conflict in Colombia.

As Vega explains, the U.S. has for decades supported one side of that conflict – namely, the side of the wealthy corporations and landowners in Colombia who continue, with the U.S.’s help, to hold onto an unjust claim of Colombia’s wealth and land. As Vega explains, this in fact is the root cause of the conflict in Colombia. And indeed, the U.S. support for the Colombian economic elite has taken the form of both creating and supporting the right-wing paramilitary groups (a.k.a. death squads) that protect the interests of those powerful forces in Colombia against the rest of the population. These paramilitaries, by the way, are notorious for using rape as a weapon in the conflict.

And so as Vega explains, the U.S., through its 1962 mission led by General William Yarborough, openly called for the Colombian state to organize paramilitary groups to carry out activities, including “sabotage and/or terrorist activities against known supporters of Communism” and called for the U.S. to support these efforts to create these paramilitary groups.

It is important to note, as Vega does in his article, that the so-called “Communists” were people who had organized peasant communes (known as “independent republics”) throughout Colombia and who were not a physical threat to the Colombian state. But nonetheless, the U.S. called for these groups to be destroyed violently through both military and paramilitary means.

The largest of the operations to destroy the independent republics took place in May of 1964 in Marquetalia. There, the state carried out the recommendations of General Yarborough in attacking peasants and native peoples with heavy firearms, including aerial bombings, in the largest counter-insurgency operation in Latin America up to that point. The U.S. delivered half a million dollars as a contribution to that pacification campaign.

As Vega and numerous other Colombian historians have opined, this operation was the precipitating event for the beginning of the current civil war as the peasant guerilla leaders who survived that assault formed themselves into the FARC guerillas which continue to this day and which are now negotiating with the Colombian government in Havana for a peace accord.

Meanwhile, between 1950 and 1970, over 4,500 Colombian military troops were trained in the U.S. School of the Americas, and the main focus of the indoctrination by the U.S. was to encourage the torture and disappearance of the so-called Communists and other opponents of the government. And since that time, the U.S. has intervened to prevent successful peace processes in Colombia.

For example, while the Colombian government and the FARC began a peace process in earnest in 1998, in 1999 the Colombian government became the third largest recipient of the U.S. military aid in the world pursuant to President Clinton’s so-called Plan Colombia which represented a major boost of military support to Colombia to aggressively combat the guerillas while leaving the right-wing paramilitaries alone to carry out their attacks against the population. Vega quotes William Wood, U.S. Ambassador to Colombia between the years 2003 and 2007, who stated that “there is no country including Afghanistan in which we had more activity.”

In the end, Vega concludes that “the interference of the United States in the social conflict has been constant and direct from the late 1940’s and this has been expressed both in military aid and the promotion of policies of counter-insurgency.” He concludes that the U.S. prevented peaceful solutions to structural causes of the social conflict from succeeding in Colombia, and that the result was the prolongation and intensification of the conflict, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents and the displacement of six million people.

He concludes that the U.S. must accept responsibility for those that it directly and indirectly victimized, just as the U.S. is calling upon the FARC to accept responsibility for the crimes that it committed. I could not agree more.

Communication Security Establishment’s Cyberwarfare Toolbox Revealed

1297423615318_ORIGINALMexico, North Africa, Middle East among targets of cyber-spy hacking

By Amber Hildebrandt, Michael Pereira and Dave Seglins
CBC News

Top-secret documents obtained by the CBC show Canada’s electronic spy agency has developed a vast arsenal of cyberwarfare tools alongside its U.S. and British counterparts to hack into computers and phones in many parts of the world, including in friendly trade countries like Mexico and hotspots like the Middle East.

The little known Communications Security Establishment wanted to become more aggressive by 2015, the documents also said.

Revelations about the agency’s prowess should serve as a “major wakeup call for all Canadians,” particularly in the context of the current parliamentary debate over whether to give intelligence officials the power to disrupt national security threats, says Ronald Deibert, director of the Citizen Lab, the respected internet research group at University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs.

“These are awesome powers that should only be granted to the government with enormous trepidation and only with a correspondingly massive investment in equally powerful systems of oversight, review and public accountability,” says Deibert.

Details of the CSE’s capabilities are revealed in several top-secret documents analyzed by CBC News in collaboration with The Intercept, a U.S. news website co-founded by Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who obtained the documents from U.S. whistleblower Edward Snowden.

The CSE toolbox includes the ability to redirect someone to a fake website, create unrest by pretending to be another government or hacker, and siphon classified information out of computer networks, according to experts who viewed the documents.

The agency refused to answer questions about whether it’s using all the tools listed, citing the Security of Information Act as preventing it from commenting on such classified matters.

In a written statement, though, it did say that some of the documents obtained by CBC News were dated and do “not necessarily reflect current CSE practices or programs.”

Hacking spans globe

Canada’s electronic spy agency and the U.S. National Security Agency “cooperate closely” in “computer network access and exploitation” of certain targets, according to an April 2013 briefing note for the NSA.

Their targets are located in the Middle East, North Africa, Europe and Mexico, plus other unnamed countries connected to the two agencies’ counterterrorism goals, the documents say. Specific techniques used against the targets are not revealed.

Deibert notes that previous Snowden leaks have disclosed that the CSE uses the highly sophisticated WARRIORPRIDE malware to target cellphones, and maintains a network of infected private computers — what’s called a botnet ​— that it uses to disguise itself when hacking targets.

Other leaked documents revealed back in 2013 that the CSE spied on computers or smartphones connected to Brazil’s mining and energy ministry to get economic intelligence.

But the latest top-secret documents released to CBC News and The Intercept illustrate the development of a large stockpile of Canadian cyber-spy capabilities that go beyond hacking for intelligence, including:

  • destroying infrastructure, which could include electricity, transportation or banking systems;
  • creating unrest by using false-flags — ie. making a target think another country conducted the operation;
  • disrupting online traffic by such techniques as deleting emails, freezing internet connections, blocking websites and redirecting wire money transfers.

It’s unclear which of the 32 cyber tactics listed in the 2011 document are actively used or in development.

‘In Canada’s interests’

Some of the capabilities mirror what CSE’s U.S. counterpart, the NSA, can do under a powerful hacking program called QUANTUM, which was created by the NSA’s elite cyberwarfare unit, Tailored Access Operations, says Christopher Parsons, a post-doctoral fellow at the Citizen Lab, one of the groups CBC News asked to help decipher the CSE documents. QUANTUM is mentioned in the list of CSE cyber capabilities.

A 2011 presentation by a CSE analyst outlines 32 tactics that the spy agency has developed. Click on the photo to see an explainer on some of them.

Publicizing details of QUANTUM’s attack techniques fuelled debate south of the border about the project’s constitutionality, says Parsons, who feels a debate is needed here in Canada as well.

“Our network has been turned into a battlefield without any Canadian being asked: Should it be done? How should it be done?” says Parsons.

National security expert Christian Leuprecht says the wide spectrum of cyber capabilities should come as no surprise, considering Canada’s stature as an industrialized country and partner in the influential Five Eyes spying network, which also includes the U.S., U.K., New Zealand and Australia.

“I think it’s in Canada’s interest to have full-spectrum capability, because if or when the issue does arise, then we want to make sure we can be a major player in taking our collective security interest into our hands,” says Leuprecht, a fellow at Queen’s University’s Centre for International and Defence Policy and professor at the Royal Military College.

Leuprecht adds, however, that “simply having that capability doesn’t necessarily mean we’re going to deploy” it.

He also claims Canada has “very explicitly” decided — for now — not to become embroiled in a dangerous cyberwar by using its most destructive tools to attack other countries, citing the example of the mysterious shutdown of North Korea’s internet following that country’s alleged hacking of Sony Pictures.

Canada also faces practical limitations in deploying some of these tools, such as money and strict laws, he says.

Seeking approval for more disruption

According to the documents, the CSE wanted more aggressive powers for use both at home and abroad.

In 2011, the Canadian agency presented its vision for 2015 to the Five Eyes allies at a conference.

CSE CASCADE presentation

“We will seek the authority to conduct a wide spectrum of Effects operations in support of our mandates,” the top-secret presentation says.

Effects operations refer to manipulating and disrupting computers or devices.

CSE said in a written statement: “In moving from ideas or concepts to planning and implementation, we examine proposals closely to ensure that they comply with the law and internal policies, and that they ultimately lead to effective and efficient ways to protect Canada and Canadians against threats.”

Experts say the Anti-Terrorism Act, Bill C-51, currently being debated, could legalize use of some of the capabilities outlined in these classified documents.

Though the act would give CSIS, Canada’s domestic intelligence agency, the power to disrupt threats to the security of Canada both at home and abroad, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service relies on its sister service, the CSE, for technical help with surveillance and infiltration of cellphones and computers.

“With Bill C-51, we’re seeing increased powers being provided to CSIS, and that could mean that they would be able to more readily use or exploit the latent domestic capabilities that CSE has built up,” says Parsons.

A ‘perimeter around Canada’

In an increasingly hostile cyberspace, Canada has also turned its attention to figuring out ways to better protect itself against such attacks.

‘If we wish to enable defence, we must have intelligence to know when attacks enter our national infrastructure.’- CSE presentation

Back in 2011, CSE envisioned creating a “perimeter around Canada” to better defend the country’s interests from potential threats from other countries and criminals, raising the prospect the agency was preparing a broad surveillance program to target Canadians’ online traffic.

At the time, “full visibility of our national infrastructure” was among its goals, according to a planning document for 2015. Security analysts wanted the means to detect an attack before it hit a target like a government website.

“If we wish to enable defence, we must have intelligence to know when attacks enter our national infrastructure,” the 2011 top-secret CSE presentation says.

The agency would not answer how far it got with the 2015 plan. A spokesman called some of the documents obtained by CBC dated and said they “explored possible ideas.”

As a result, the information “does not necessarily reflect current CSE practices or programs,” the agency said in a written statement.

“Logically, it makes perfect sense” that CSE wanted to monitor all traffic coming in and out of the country, says Deibert.

“The problem is the techniques they have at their disposal, the capabilities, if they are indeed in place, are dual use and could be abused.”

List of documents:

CBC is working with U.S. news site The Intercept to shed light on Canada-related files in the cache of documents obtained by U.S. whistleblower Edward Snowden.

The CBC News team — Dave Seglins, Amber Hildebrandt and Michael Pereira —collaborated with The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald and Ryan Gallagher to analyze the documents.

With files from The Intercept’s Ryan Gallagher and Glenn Greenwald

Canada’s Orwellian C-51 Anti-Terrorist Act of 2015 Criminalizes Dissent (Update)
Canadian Terror Wave a Modern-Day Gladio
Canadian Government and Media Creating a Moral Panic as ISIL Attacks Ottawa
CSIS Agent Helped British Girls Join ISIS in Syria

US vs. Latin American Leaders

Who’s Behind the Marches Against Brazil’s President?

The political forces organizing the marches this Sunday against the democratically elected government of Dilma Rousseff began conspiring against the leftist president immediately after it became known that she had won the run-off election in October, 2014 against the candidate of the Brazilian elites, Aecio Neves.

A woman wears a shirt with an image of Brazil

The right-wing political opposition in Brazil has been reluctant to accept the results of that election, seeking to implement their neoliberal agenda by whatever means they can. The opposition, like their right-wing contemporaries in the rest of Latin America, have become frustrated at their repeated electoral defeats. The leftist Workers’ Party (PT) has been in power since Rousseff’s predecessor, Luis Ignacio Lula da Silva, won the presidential election in 2002.

Leaders of the Free Brazil Movement (MBL), one of the main organizers of the marches on Sunday, told Folha de Sao Paulo, “The main aim of the movement, at this moment, is to overthrow the PT, the biggest nemesis of freedom and democracy that haunts our country.”

In light of this goal, the MBL has been pushing for impeachment proceedings against Rousseff. Supporters of the government consider this an attempt to hold a “third round” of elections. They accuse opponents of wilfully ignoring the fact that Rousseff won the election with 51.64 percent of the vote, in an election that was affirmed by the Supreme Electoral Tribunal. Rousseff has referred to the attempt to hold a “third round” as a break with democratic order in the country. “The election is over. A third round… can not occur unless one wants a break with democracy,” said the Brazilian president during an event earlier this month.

The Brazilian Social Democratic Party (PSDB) is also backing the marches on Sunday, but stops short of backing a call for the impeachment of Rousseff. The party’s national president and former presidential candidate, Aecio Neves, said he would not personally attend but the party and its members would attend.

In a statement released Friday, the PSDB criticized those who said the marches on Sunday are calling for a break with democratic order. However, there are numerous groups openly calling for the military to intervene and remove Rousseff from power. These groups have stated that they too back the marches on Sunday and will turn out and demand a military intervention.

Calls for a coup d’état to remove the PT from power are not new. Shortly after Rousseff’s re-election in October, supporters were mobilized to defend Rousseff’s victory and reject calls for an impeachment or military intervention. The opposition insists that Brazil is in the midst of a political crisis. In an interview with Carta Capital, Miguel Rossetto, secretary-general of the office of the presidency stated, “There is no political crisis. The neoliberals and conservatives were defeated electorally, the crisis is theirs, because they lost.”

However, the opposition has been successful in utilizing a corruption scandal at Petrobras, the state oil company, to mobilize Brazilians in protest. The opposition has deliberately tried to tie Rousseff to the Petrobras scandal, despite the fact that she has been cleared of involvement. A new expanded investigation into the scandal named a number of high-ranking politicians, however Rousseff is not under investigation.

The powerful private media in Brazil has deliberately tried to tie Rousseff to the Petrobras scandal. Veja magazine deliberately published unsubstantiated accusations that both President Rousseff and her predecessor were connected to the Petrobras scandal in order to try to influence the election. The Center for Economic Policy found the media disproportionately represented Dilma Rousseff and the Workers’ Party in an unfavorable light compared to opposition candidate Aecio Neves.

The Brazilian media giant, Rede Globo, has also played an active role in mobilizing against the governments of the PT. The network has changed its programming in order to encourage more people to attend the marches and will broadcast Sunday’s events live on its networks. Erick Bretas, one of Globo’s directors, publicly announced that he would attend Sunday’s march.

The controversy over the role played by Globo is such that supporters of the government have taken to calling them coup-backers and have been denouncing them over social media.

Brazilians have also questioned exactly who is behind the marches this Sunday. Investigations have revealed ties between the so-called grassroots organizations such as the MBL, and the powerful far-right neoconservative Koch brothers from the United States. Journalists were also able to ascertain that the Vem Pra Rua group is funded by a foundation belonging to Brazil’s richest man, lending credibility to the PT’s argument that the marches

“This is a manipulation, with a view towards a coup, that comes mainly from the bourgeois and upper-middle class sectors,” said Alberto Cantalice, national vice-president of the PT.

Brazilians March in Widespread Support of Rousseff

The hashtag “Sunday I will not go,” in reference to Sunday’s opposition march is now trending on Twitter.

The Brazilian people staged massive demonstrations throughout the country in support of President Dilma Rousseff on Friday.

Marches were held in at least 23 of Brazil’s major cities.

The demonstrations in support of Rousseff come after the right-wing opposition organized a series of protests set for Sunday, demanding the president’s impeachment.

​Social movements, parties and activists joined efforts to organize the mobilizations across the country. Some of the main organizers were the Movement of Landless Campesinos (MST), the Central Workers Union (CUT), the Brazilian Workers Union (CTB) and the governing Worker’s Party (PT).

With banners in defense of democracy and of the state-owned oil company Petrobras, the social movements registered over 100,000 people participating in demonstrations nationwide.

Brazilian media outlets have reported in recent days that businessmen are trying to force employees to attend Sunday’s acts against the president.

In response, thousands of people are using the hashtag #EuNaoVou (I won’t go) to show their rejection of the impeachment march, which is being organized through social media campaigns.

Some Brazilian twitter users are making reference to past episodes in the country’s history of military coups against progressive governments.

The tweet below reads “I will not go because I studied history.”

Some users have pointed at Jorge Paulo Lemann, the richest person in Brazil, who has been financially backing the march. This tweet denounces his financing of the website (Come to the, one of the main organizers of the protests.

Other users reject the impeachment as an attempt from the right-wing parties to achieve what they could not during the elections, a recurring description used by the President Rousseff herself, who described the calls to impeachment as a “third round” election.

The tweet below reads “15/03 I will not go. Elections are a serious thing, and people’s hysteria should be solved through analysis.”

In a similar tone, the tweet below reads “I will not go because I voted in the elections, because I respect the people’s will, because I don’t support a coup!”

Will Brazilians Mobilize to Defeat US-CIA Destabilization Plot?
CIA-Supported Hopeful Runs for Presidency in Brazil
Dilma Rousseff was the Ultimate Target of the CIA’s Assassination of Eduardo Campos
US Intelligence Link to Brazilian Plane Crash that Killed Presidential Candidate
The US vs. Brazil: From Espionage to Destabilization
Who is Shaking Up Brazil and Why
Brazil: When FB calls the shots, revolutionaries should worry

The American Deep State: An Interview with Peter Dale Scott

Project Censored

Alternate Audio Link

Hosts: Mickey Huff and Peter Phillips

Guest: Peter Dale Scott is a former Canadian diplomat, professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley, and a prolific author. More about Scott and his work can be found at

Producer and Engineer: Anthony Fest; Erica Bridgeman

Transcription: Janice Matthews (edited by Mickey Huff)

The program aired live from Berkeley, CA, KPFA studios. Special thanks goes to Janice Matthews for the transcription.

The following is a transcript of a recent interview conducted by Mickey Huff and Peter Phillips for the Project Censored Show on Pacifica Radio. They sat down with noted author and scholar Peter Dale Scott to discuss his latest book, The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil and the Attack on U.S. Democracy. This wide-ranging discussion examines the “Deep State,” an evolving level of secret government separate from the elected government. Scott looks at the origins of the deep state, its communications and finances, and its involvement in landmark events, from the JFK assassination to Watergate, to September 11th and beyond.

Mickey Huff: Welcome to the Project Censored Show on Pacifica Radio. I’m Mickey Huff, in studio with Peter Phillips. Today’s program, “Deep Politics, Deep Events, and the Deep State.” We’ll be in conversation with author/scholar Dr. Peter Dale Scott for the hour as we discuss his newest book, The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil and the Attack on US Democracy.

Today’s program we are honored for the hour to have as our guest Dr. Peter Dale Scott. His newest book is, The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil and the Attack on US Democracy. Peter Dale Scott is a former Canadian diplomat and professor emeritus at the University of California-Berkeley. He’s a leading political analyst and poet. His books include Deep Politics and the Death of JFK; Drugs, Oil and War: The United States in Afghanistan, Colombia and IndoChina; The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire and the Future of America; The War Conspiracy: JFK, 9/11 and the Deep Politics of War; and American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection and the Road to Afghanistan. He’s been awarded the Lannan Poetry Award and his website can be found at We urge you to look into that website to see the vast wealth of scholarship that Peter Dale Scott has given us over the years. Peter Dale Scott, thanks so much for joining us today.

Peter Dale Scott: It’s always great to be on this show.

Peter Phillips: We’re really happy to have you here. I’ve just finished reading your book, The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil and the Attack on US Democracy, and it’s a nice follow-up to your book The American War Machine, which I used in my class this semester. I really want to ask: In your new book you talk about the egalitarian mindset culture of America. We believe in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, open government, transparency. And then you say also that there’s a dark side, or a deep side inside America that’s repressive, that is looking to be able to detain people without warrants, warrantless wire tapping and all of that – there’s a repressive side. Can you tell us a little bit more about how you frame this understanding of this culture of repression?

Peter Dale Scott: Actually, I think there’s always been a deep state in America and there have been times when it has been very repressive. We’re in a period of, you might say, surplus repression – repression that doesn’t serve anyone’s interests, not even the interests of the ruling class. It’s not the first time in American history. I would say probably a good analogy would be 1919 and the Palmer Raids, which is a period in America history that I think everyone’s embarrassed by now because some very fine people like Emma Goldman, who was actually a US citizen, got deported without any procedure whatsoever.

Taking apart what you just said, I believe there has always been a deep state in this country, even before the Revolution. You could say the deep state found it convenient to have a revolution and get free from the British government which was about to end slavery, which would have been extremely embarrassing for a lot of businessmen in America, North and South.

But it’s not in its essence repressive; it’s just repressive when it wants to be. I think a lot of the trouble we’re in now, actually is – and I say this in my book – that in the 1970s the deep state – the bankers, the lawyers, the people in foundations, all kinds of people – were really quite terrified at the forces in America calling for revolution – the African-Americans, the riots we had in big cities but also, equally and perhaps ultimately even more, the anti-war movement because if you had a successful anti-war movement that would mean America would have to get out of the business of war. And that was, I think, an intolerable thought for them.

So you had the Lewis Powell memo in 1971, which said that those of us in power should mobilize our wealth and resources to do something about this phenomenon. I don’t attach so much importance to the wording of that memo, and I’m sure there were many like it. It’s significant to me that Lewis Powell did that for the chamber of commerce. And the chamber of commerce is really one of the most powerful lobbies in this country. It’s so powerful you almost never read about it.  It’s one of those deep presences that rarely rise to the level of being written about in history.

I have a whole chapter about the period 1960-1980 when there was obviously great tension between the constitutional state and the presidents elected in it and the deep state, the heads of the CIA. We went through – I should have counted it up – four or five heads of CIA in 20 years and look what happened to those presidents. Kennedy was assassinated; he said he was going to break the CIA into a thousand pieces and then in 1963 he’s dead. Lyndon Johnson; the whole story of his involvement in Vietnam is too complicated to go into here, but the long and short of it was here was an incumbent president who had to announce he wasn’t going to run for re-election. Richard Nixon is the next one, and he doesn’t fill out his second term; he has to resign. Then you have Gerald Ford, who did stand for re-election but failed to be re-elected. He was the first incumbent not to be re-elected since Hoover. And then after him, Jimmy Carter was the same thing. I have most to say about the very weird circumstances which led to the delay in the return of the hostages in Iran until – get this – the day that Ronald Reagan was elected was the day that the hostages were released, and that was by prior arrangement between – some people would say treasonous arrangements – between the Republicans and the new forces in Iran.

So you had a period when it was almost deep state versus the public state. And then with the Reagan revolution it ends because the deep state in effect has taken over and you get – well, I could talk about COG later in the program, Continuity of Government Planning – but a lot of things begin with the election of Reagan, which lead directly to 9/11 and the fix that we’re in now.

Mickey Huff: Peter Dale Scott, some of the excerpts of your book have been published at with Russ Baker and some of your other work, for people looking for it, is in Japan Focus. So there was some material coming out, sort of teasers about your book, The American Deep State, before it came out.

Peter Dale Scott: Could I add to that early versions of many chapters will be found on Japan Focus. If you’re not sure you want to buy the book you can read my various articles over the last four years on Japan Focus.

Mickey Huff: And we urge listeners to do that. We had you on a number of months ago talking about the Wall Street overlords and some of these things, on the pieces you had. I wanted to call attention to this because even though you’ve been writing about the deep state for a long time, it’s something that now has seemed to come more and more – this is one of our top censored stories last year, the Mike Lofgren story. But that’s been getting more play. It was on Moyers and Company and then the Boston Globe recently was sort of acknowledging that this thing exists, which means in some parts it’s kind of moving beyond the pejorative conspiracy realm. We see that terminology used to demonize people that ask these questions.

Peter Dale Scott: I quote for an op-ed that came out in the New York Times at the beginning of the year that talked about the new memes from last year, and one of them was the deep state. Now everybody’s talking about it. That doesn’t come from me; that comes from the New York Times. So that actually affected the title I chose. I had been thinking of calling it The Doomsday Project, which is the Pentagon’s term for continuity of government planning.

There are really two halves of my book. There is the settled condition of the deep state and then there is this moving force that has been instituting change, particularly since 9/11 but as far back as Iran-Contra, and that is things which are done under the cover of Continuity of Government planning, COG planning. This is what Oliver North was doing in the mid-1980s when he was asked, very astutely, if he was planning for suspension of the US Constitution. And the answer was – he didn’t get to speak the answer. A gavel came down from the chairman – the Democratic chairman, I may say – that we couldn’t go into this in a public session. But yes, he was planning for the suspension of the Constitution and I can name three ways in which I think it has been since suspended.

This is the core of the COG part of the book, these three things:

First of all, warrantless surveillance. That was instituted shortly after 9/11, shortly after COG was implemented for the first time, on the day of 9/11, and of course, we all know about that now from Edward Snowden but we should have known it. It’s not really a secret.

The second one goes with it and, to me, is even more ominous, warrantless detention. Everybody’s subject to warrantless surveillance but a lot of people feel, “Well, they’re never going to detain me” so there’s much less interest in it. But I can tell you, if you’re a Muslim in this country you’re very aware that right after 9/11 something like 1,000 Muslims were just rounded up, and rounded up pretty blindly. I talked to one of them. He wasn’t even an Arab. He wasn’t a Sunni. He was a Shia from Iran and an academic and they just rounded him up, held him without a warrant for 80 days. They beat him so severely that there was urine in his blood and in the end they just let him go and said, ‘Don’t do anything to us and we won’t do anything to you.’ This is a huge scandal and it makes me feel like we’re in the condition of Nazi Germany in this respect that this one group was so – and by the way, is still being persecuted. The mosques all through this country are filled with informants. They get a Muslim on a misdemeanor and it’s either jail or become an informant. It’s been very demoralizing. Books have been written about the scandals happening here. The FBI has a very good set of guidelines on how to handle informants; they don’t follow the guidelines. They should. So anyway, that’s the second one, warrantless detention – and it’s not a possibility; it’s something that has happened.

And the third one, when Oliver North was talking about it was the proclamation of martial law. They didn’t do it that way but what they have done, publicly have done, is to militarize police work or Homeland Security so that the US Army is now involved in a permanent way in the business of policing citizens. One of the things I think is important enough to put in my first chapter is there is now a permanent brigade that is permanently stationed in the United States and its job is to deal with civil disturbance. That is to say, if there’s an anti-war rally and the police can’t make everybody go home – and they certainly use pretty extreme techniques these days, with their Humvees and so on – but if the police can’t do it then the military will come in. And it’s worse than that because the military is involved in surveillance, regular surveillance, all the time.

One aspect of the deep state we haven’t mentioned yet are what I call the private intelligence corporations. They say that now something like 70% of the US intelligence budget is outsourced and goes to companies like Booz Allen Hamilton. A lot of people have never heard of these companies but they’re part of the governing structure of our country now. Certainly SAIC is involved in surveillance for profit and you can imagine that they have a very good motive to exaggerate whatever it is they’re seeing because that becomes the basis for more funds for yet more surveillance.

So those three, everyone should have them clearly in their mind: 1) warrantless surveillance, 2) warrantless detention and 3) the militarization of Homeland Security. We live now under an army command, a permanent Army command, NORTHCOM for North America just like the US Army in South America has SOUTHCOM. They’re treating us the way they have learned to treat the rest of the world and that is not good.

Mickey Huff: Peter Dale Scott, I just wanted to back up very quickly for a moment. Posse Comitatus, 1878 – that’s gone with military commissions. It sounds like this brigade is obviously in violation of that.

Peter Dale Scott: Yes. The purpose of the Posse Comitatus Act, which ended Reconstruction in the South because the South were able successfully to say, ‘We’ll vote for your presidential candidate if you get the Army off our backs.’ And so these acts were passed. I read an article that says, ‘oh, no, they’re not being violated’ but I think they clearly are. Because the point now is yes, you can bring the Army in, in an emergency. Well, that’s the trick, you see, because officially we are in a state of emergency. We have been ever since September 14th, 2001 and we have a National Emergencies Act. These states of emergency are supposed to be reviewed first of all by the president, and I’m really shocked that every year they get renewed, first by Bush – that wasn’t surprising; he had instituted it in the first place – but Obama has continued to renew the emergency every September.

And the second part is even more scandalous. Congress is required by law – this is not an option; it’s a requirement – to review a state of emergency and either approve it or terminate it and they’re supposed to do that within six months. We’re well beyond six months after September 2001 but Congress has never done this. A former congressman and I tried to mount a national campaign to get Congress to do this and one of the congressmen told a constituent, “Oh, that legal requirement I think has been superseded by COG.” Well, if that’s true – and I don’t want to put too much weight on it because that’s just one thing that we heard – but if it were true, that would corroborate that, indeed, COG meant suspension of the Constitution.

We can’t have the public laws of the land being overridden by secret rules that nobody has ever seen that were drawn up by people who weren’t even in the government – including, for 20 years, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney. They were planning all this, starting in 1982 up until 2001 when the planning stopped. But lo and behold, on 9/11/2001, they instituted the very rules that they had been planning for 20 years.

Peter Phillips: Peter, let me try to go back and paraphrase what you’ve been saying here. I think it’s really important. Historically, there’s a power elite in the United States that makes decision behind closed doors in various nontransparent ways that are implemented by the government in some capacity. And at various times, when they’re perceiving a crisis happening, like in the ‘70s, certainly the ‘50s after World War II, the Palmer Raids after World War I and I would even go back to the 1870s.

Peter Dale Scott: Oh, yes. It goes way back. In fact, you know it goes back to John Adams.

Mickey Huff: With the Alien and Sedition Acts.

Peter Phillips: Exactly. But the intelligence agencies, or the police state activists at the time, goes back to J. Edgar Hoover and of course, forward now to NORTHCOM, implement activities or engage in deep events that precipitate the goals of this non-transparent power elite. One of the questions that came up is with NORTHCOM. Army intelligence is based down in Arizona. Is the brigade based there, too?

Peter Dale Scott: No. I think it’s in Ohio. I’m not sure but it’s not in Arizona, for sure.

Peter Phillips: And they practice invading various cities and that. They practiced invading Oakland a few years back.

Peter Dale Scott: Yes, they do. They have their war games. They certainly do.

Peter Phillips: You and Dan Hamburg, who was the congressperson, asked about why Congress did not question this continued state of emergency that makes official the Continuity of Government activities that are ongoing, and essentially were told to never mind.

Peter Dale Scott: As I said, we were told that old law doesn’t apply anymore because we’re in a new state of affairs with COG.

Peter Phillips: So COG was implemented within hours of the first plane hitting the World Trade Center.

Peter Dale Scott: Yes. What that means is very difficult to decipher. I’m sure the full range of COG plans is enormous and not all of it was instituted. Some of it was visible. You had to decode the fact that President Bush was in Tampa and stayed out of Washington until about 3:00 in the afternoon. He went to Barksdale in New Orleans, then he went to Offutt.

By the way, Offutt is the base which is the base for the E-4B planes, the so-called Doomsday Planes. I have one on the cover of the book. There was one over the White House, by the way, on 9/11. That’s forbidden airspace. What was an E-4B Doomsday Plane doing – that’s why people poured out of the White House suddenly in a panic, because there was a plane overhead.

Anyway, that whole situation where Bush stayed out of the thing was because Cheney was in Washington. Then when he came back at 3:00, Cheney left Washington. He went to a hollowed-out mountain, Site R, I think it was – there’s more than one near Washington. He went to one of the Continuity of Government special seats of government and he stayed there for 90 days without about 100 people.  What they were doing I don’t know but I will guess that they were dusting off the planned PATRIOT Act, which they were able to produce – like the Tonkin Gulf Resolution was produced back in 1964. The emergency detention planning, which is Homeland Security, had a 10-year plan. The budget for just one year was $400 million so they’re not kidding around with plans for emergency detention.

As late as 2007 – and we haven’t seen any terrorist hijackers in quite a while in 2007 – but President Bush, in renewing the state of emergency, made reference to new COG elements which, of course, we’re not allowed to see. And it was very interesting that congressman who was on the Homeland Security Committee wanted to see these new regulations. He was told he couldn’t see them; he didn’t have the clearance. He had all the regular clearances. So then the committee itself, in writing, requested to see these new COG regulations and the committee was told they couldn’t see it.

So this is a very clear example where the public state wants to know what’s happening up there at the level of the deep state and the deep state said, ‘Sorry, you’re not allowed to know.’ So that’s why, in a very real sense, we don’t have the constitutional government that we think we have.

Peter Phillips: And this is certainly more serious now than ever before, I think is what you’re saying.

Peter Dale Scott: Yes, and particularly serious since 9/11, but that whole change, which happened on 9/11, was being planned ever since 1982 so that’s why the Reagan Revolution is so important.

Peter Phillips: You talk about deep state events and –

Peter Dale Scott: Yes. Deep events.

Peter Phillips: – and deep events that are structural that had major changes. Certainly the assassination of John Kennedy was one of those.

Peter Dale Scott: The quintessential one, yes. See, a lot of people don’t know that anything changed after the Kennedy assassination but it did.  There was a totally illogical but predictable recommendation from the Warren Commission – Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, a finding of fact, and then a recommendation to increase surveillance of groups in America and create more compatibility between CIA computer and FBI computers. And that was – we’ve had more and more and more of that since.

Peter Phillips: Consolidation of the national security state, in that sense.

Peter Dale Scott: Exactly right.

Peter Phillips: And kind of ongoing, with all the presidents since then.

Peter Dale Scott: And Watergate – you see, a lot of people say Watergate was a great victory for freedom and the end of totalitarianism and the imperial government and so on. Watergate was a transitional event in which people both on the Left and more importantly on the Right, wanted to get rid of this man who was in the middle, Richard Nixon.  I had a whole Watergate chapter that didn’t get into my last two books so maybe it will get into my next one.

We don’t understand the Watergate break-in. there was a great deal of analysis of Watergate, which is what Nixon did in response to the break-in, but if you look at the break-in, it is very clear it was carried out by extreme right-wingers: James McCord, Liddy, Howard Hunt. All these people are way to the right of Richard Nixon. And there was a kind of struggle for the conscience of American in the ‘70s. You had Senator Church in the Senate beginning to expose what they – and there’s a very ominous prediction from Senator Church, which I use as an epigraph. He said the powers that the NSA has are the kind of powers that could create a totalitarian system. So he was moving the country in one direction and that increased the counter-planning from the people who wanted exactly, who believed that American needed to have more control from above because popular movements represented a threat to the grand design for American power overseas.

Peter Phillips: You’ve identified consistencies in sort of these deep state structural events that in each of the cases the Continuity of Government national communications systems were used. In other words, these are private communications systems that no public can see, set up as part of the Doomsday Project. Is that correct?

Peter Dale Scott:  You’ve just stated what I believe but it’s not quite what I write. What I write is that there is COG involvement in the Kennedy assassination, in Watergate, in the October Surprise, which prevented the re-election of Carter, in Iran-Contra and most obviously in 9/11, which is the day they implemented it for the first time.

Now, I would not say – what I do say, and you encapsulated it – in the case of Iran-Contra, there was Oliver North conducting an operation which Congress had forbidden in a law. He was acting illegally and he had access to this emergency network, the Doomsday Network, which was to be put into action if there was ever an atomic attack on the United States. But he didn’t wait for an atomic attack. He said, ‘Oh, I’ll use it to get arms to Iran.’ So he was able to send cables to people who were in the know – some in the government, some not in the government – in Lisbon where the arms – there was a plane shipment to go from Lisbon to Tehran and he wanted these people to get an order from him which the ambassador couldn’t see because the ambassador would have said, ‘Hey, you can’t do that; it’s illegal.’ So he used the emergency network, the Doomsday Network, and I believe that the same thing – because there were arms to Iran also in the October Surprise – and I suspect that that may have happened then, too. That, I really don’t know.

When it comes to Watergate, what I do know, and it’s been known for decades, is that James McCord, who was the most important by far of the people who broke into Watergate, was part of a special group that was in charge of planning what to do if there was an atomic attack. He was part of the COG network. And there are two people – I did a special article about this that’s online – two very suspicious individuals who were part of the Kennedy assassination story and both of them were part of the emergency network of that day. It wasn’t, I think, called COG in 1963 but it’s the same network. For that matter, the predecessor of the E-4B turned up over Texas. I don’t mention this in the book because it’s a very complex and mysterious event and it may have been – it’s just a very strange event.

But the important thing to remember is, you look into any of these structural deep events and you’re going to see a COG connection, whether it’s personnel, financing or modus operandi. There’s three different ways it can be involved.

Mickey Huff: We’re talking with author and scholar Peter Dale Scott. His newest book, The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil and the Attack on US Democracy. It is out now from Roman and Littlefield. You can learn more at

Peter Dale Scott, we’re talking about Continuity of Government, talking about the so-called Doomsday Project, and you were talking, too, about how there are these different factions, these struggling factions, as it were, even within the government and against the public interest. At the very outset here on the sleeve of your book it mentions that “behind public and private institutions is the traditional influence of Wall Street bankers and lawyers allied with international oil companies beyond the reach of domestic law. And with the importance of Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, oil markets, American defense companies and Wall Street itself, this essential book” of yours, The American Deep State, “shows that there is now a supranational deep state, sometimes demonstrably opposed to both White House policies and the American public interest.” That certainly sounds like something you were alluding to in Watergate, certainly something else that may be going on with something like Iran-Contra and you mentioned previously to that October Surprise. Then there’s BCCI and then, of course, the events of 9/11 themselves.

Peter Dale Scott: Particularly important in this would the – of course, the oil companies are behind the special relationship that America has with Saudi Arabia and the United Emirates. It used to be with Qatar but that seems to be – Qatar and Saudi Arabia are at odds with each other because Saudi Arabia is really terrified of radical Muslims and they have good reason to be. They have a large Shia population. Qatar isn’t because it’s a tiny country and they have the goods on everybody. I suspect we’ll find there’s a much stronger connection between Qatar and ISIL. We’re pretending that they’re part of the alliance against it.

Qatar isn’t even really a state; it’s a family. And so is Saudi Arabia. It’s a royal family and there are factions within those families. We know that when Saudi Sheikh Mohammed, the so-called organizer of 9/11, who was in Qatar and the CIA came to get him out of there – what the 9/11 Report calls a “dissident member of the family” let him know so that he was able to escape. Well, the dissident member of the family was the minister of the interior, so he’s not really all that dissident. But this whole mélange – and I have about three chapters about all the ways in which central figures of al Qaeda have been released, sometimes by the United States, sometimes by Qatar, sometimes by Saudi Arabia themselves – it’s all because these forces are useful at that level. And they certainly – I don’t want to get into the subject matter of The American War Machine or The Road to 9/11 but I guess I covered that most, really, in The Road to 9/11.

Peter Phillips: You were quite clear in the Road to 9/11 and in your current book that this deep state network that uses the Continuity of Government planning as a mechanism, I would think, and certainly elements of the CIA and other intelligence agencies are involved – with other countries – that there are funding mechanisms that go along with this. And part of that funding is money that’s kind of off the books, so to speak, going all the way back to loot from World War II – OSS and that, some monies from both Japan and Germany – but also drug money from both the Vietnam and the Golden Triangle in the ‘50s and the ‘60s in Burma and Laos and Cambodia.

Peter Dale Scott: Yes. But the drug money doesn’t come into the CIA treasury. The drug money finances what the people at the CIA regard as assets. If they want an army in Thailand or in Burma, they don’t have to pay for that army. The army pays for itself by drug trafficking.

Peter Phillips: There are bank accounts all over and BCCI was certainly one bank that helped with that. But in addition to that, you talked about how arms sales, particularly to the Saudis, carry kickbacks with them and that money is available for deep state activities, as well.

Peter Dale Scott: I’d like to restate what you just said because it’s so important. The CIA, from the day it was set up, has never been constrained by the budget, which Congress gives to them. They’ve always had access to other funds and it was planned that way. The architect originally was Allen Dulles.

Allen Dulles’s power in 1946 exemplifies the power of the deep state because when William Donovan, the head of OSS, came back to America he wanted to have a permanent OSS, or we might say a CIA, and Truman didn’t want that and he shut down OSS. That represented his sincere concern that a permanent CIA could be a threat to American democracy. He believed that and ultimately, he said that in 1963 after the Kennedy assassination – very interesting timing. He said I never intended the CIA to be involved in operations in this way.

But Allen Dulles did, and Allen Dulles could do three things: First of all, what we call the Marshall Plan was really Allen Dulles’s plan and I think it was a good plan. I’m not knocking it just because it came from Allen Dulles, to give a lot of aid to western Europe. I think they would have given it to eastern Europe maybe if – we don’t know. But that was a good plan. Then in January of 1946 the then-head of central intelligence, though it was a very weak post in Washington because there was no agency but just really a post, commissioned Allen Dulles to draw up plans for a permanent CIA, which ultimately Truman accepted.

The third thing is that when the Marshall Plan was passed, they inserted a secret codicil into the Marshall Plan – I don’t know how many congressmen knew this, but something like 10 percent of all the money going to western Europe would be set aside for covert operations. That’s a model for what’s happened ever since. In addition to the drug money and some other things that I’ll skip over, you start getting this pattern in the ‘60s that arms sales, particularly to Saudi Arabia but also to Japan, a certain percentage of the arms sale goes to the broker, they called it.

In Saudi Arabia it was a man called Adnan Khashoggi. He had a former CIA agent advising him on everything he did. We’re taking big money here. There’s a book about Khashoggi called The Richest Man in the World, and he was certainly up there. He got $106 million from Lockheed and that was only one company. He was getting a percentage of all the huge arms sales to Saudi Arabia. And then, in turn, he with the political advice of his ex-CIA (and, more importantly, ex-Booz Allen Hamilton), I’m talking about a man called Myles Copeland who went from CIA to Booz Allen Hamilton. People used to say of him that he used the CIA as a cover. There’s some truth to that, I think, because Booz Allen Hamilton in some ways was even closer to the heart of deep state power because they worked with the oil companies and big banks and so on – as consultants, but they directed policy.  He was spreading this money all over the world – including, by the way, doing something which the CIA cannot do. He gave maybe a million dollars in a suitcase to Richard Nixon. Of course, the CIA would never be allowed to do that but Khashoggi could. It was probably illegal but nobody – it’s been written about for decades and nobody’s ever done anything about it.

Then you got a point where Jimmy Carter really wanted to cut way back on CIA operations. This is where we see the supranational deep state rear its head. They set up a kind of parallel CIA offshore, something called the Safari Club. Actually, the Safari Club was the name of Khashoggi’s ranch in Kenya where they had their first meeting. But it wasn’t a bunch of hunters, which is what the club was. It was the heads of intelligence of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, France. And they started doing what Jimmy Carter was telling the CIA not to do and Congress was telling the CIA not to do. But just by “coincidence” Richard Helms was no longer head of CIA; he was now the ambassador in Iran. And Iran became a lynch pin for what the Safari Club was doing.

Then this great continuity – for example, Congress passed a law, the so-called Clark Amendment, which said the CIA couldn’t do anything in Angola. No problem. The Safari Club did in Angola what the CIA was forbidden to do. And then when finally Reagan was elected they repealed the Clark Amendment and went back to business as usual.

So you’ve got a second CIA offshore, and that wasn’t just for the sake of the American ruling class; that was very much in the interests of the Saudis and the Iranians. Of course, it didn’t save the shah. He exited the scene. Interestingly, they’re all monarchs – Saudi Arabia, Morocco. They’re terrified and they want this sort of thing. And that’s what I referred to by the supranational deep state.

Mickey Huff: Peter Dale Scott, let’s go up to the events of 9/11. We’ve been talking about Saudi Arabia US relations, the Saudi royal family going back with the Bush family decades so this is, again, more of the supranational kind of relationships, sort of shadow governments and so forth, not things that people are really privy to, certainly not taught these things in civics courses and so forth, as sort of how things are operating. But particularly with the Saudis, this is something that’s cropped back up again because right after 9/11 when there were no-fly orders the only flights leaving the country were the secret chartered flights from the US government taking Saudi nationals out of the country.

Peter Dale Scott: That’s correct, yes. And there were various FBI investigations, which were promptly terminated.

Mickey Huff: Right. That’s come back up more recently, at least in light of the Saudis and 9/11 with the redacted pages, the pages the US government and CIA won’t release about the relations of Saudi Arabia. Let’s talk a little bit about maybe what, again, you think that relationship is and what might be there that ties into that supranational deep state mindset.

Peter Dale Scott: You’re referring to 28 pages in the report of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11, which was chaired by Senator Bob Graham. It’s very clear that the 28 pages are about Saudi nationals in America. A lot of it has to do with two of the alleged hijackers – and I have a lot to say about them, too – Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi. They came to this LA airport in January of 2000 and the CIA knew they had come and was collecting information on them, not passing it on to the FBI, which is one of the things that has to be investigated.

But also, the Joint Committee discovered that these people were getting funds from the wife of Prince Bandar, who was the Saudi ambassador in Washington for years and years and years and years. He’s part of what I was just talking about a few minutes ago, because funds from two massive arms deals – first of all the AWACS deal, billions of dollars in 1983, and then following that, when the Jewish lobby prevented another AWACS deal there was something else called the al Yamamah deal that went to England and to BEA, which is the British equivalent of Boeing and General Dynamics all rolled up. And again, just like with the Marshall Plan, a percentage of these contracts was to be devoted to covert operations, and the funds went to Prince Bandar in Washington and were deposited in the Riggs National Bank, which was really, I would say, a CIA bank. I think Jonathan Bush, the uncle of George W. Bush, was working at that bank.

Well, some of that fund money was trickling down to two of the alleged hijackers for 18 months before 9/11, and the CIA probably knew this. Congress found out about it but Congress isn’t allowed to share with the American people what they found out. We’re not party to this. It doesn’t concern us. Oh, yes it does concern us, indeed.

In January of 2003 – I think I have the year right – it was after the report was finished and classified in this whole section – somebody leaked a pretty good summary of it to Newsweek. It was a very scary story about this Saudi money going to two of the alleged hijackers, etc. This launched an investigation. It didn’t launch an investigation of the CIA or even of the hijackers. It launched an investigation of Senator Graham because he’d been chairman of this committee and they suspected that he may have leaked it. Since then he has leaked some of it. They’ve definitely put pressure on him, as a representative of the public state, not to say anything about what the deep state had been doing at that time.

Peter Phillips: We have people in various capacities, both public and private, engaged in planning – and I would like to use the word conspiring – to make things happen, using a network called Continuity of Government as perhaps a mechanism for communications and development.

Peter Dale Scott: Is that a statement or a question?

Peter Phillips: I’m leading to a question here about a footnote you have in your book about the various conspiracies involved in 9/11.

Peter Dale Scott: Okay, but can I just respond to what you said so far? A bit earlier also you talked about there’s a power elite and they’ve been planning these things. That’s really not the analysis of my book. I think you mentioned Mike Lofgren’s article, which you have in your book, a very good article. And like me, he sees the importance of bringing in Wall Street. This is in contradistinction to another very good book. I’ve only just got it and started to read it – about double government, by a Professor [Michael J.] Glennan [his book- National Security and Double Government, Oxford University Press, 2014]. It’s more like traditional political science and he’s also very concerned about the two levels of government and I don’t want to discourage people from reading his book. It’s a good book but unlike Lofgren and me, he’s a political scientist and he’s trained just to think about government, whereas I believe and Lofgren believes no, you have to see the forces behind government, which explain why the CIA is so important. It’s so important because it’s really a creature of Wall Street that was forced on Truman and on Congress. It’s serving interests, but the interests it’s serving are not the interests of the White House, and I could give you an example.

For example, the plan to overthrow Mossaddegh in 1953, the first major CIA operation. This comes when Allen Dulles becomes the director, but it finished an operation which had been going on for two years with the oil companies trying to embargo Iranian oil. And the moment that Eisenhower was elected but before he was inaugurated they started, in the CIA, planning the overthrow of Mossaddegh. There had been no order from Eisenhower to do it and there had been an order from Truman not to do it. Churchill had asked Truman to have the CIA do this and Truman had refused. Instead, he sent Harriman to Tehran to try and get Anglo-Iranian Oil to accept the same 50:50 split that the Americans had worked out with the Saudis in Saudi Arabia. The British were too greedy; they didn’t want that. So there was no authorization but the CIA did it anyway.

Lofgren wrote this good article and he said – and it’s also a good metaphor in a way – he said that we have an iceberg and we can see the 10% above water, which is the public state, and then there’s the rest of the iceberg underneath.  I say it’s a good metaphor, but what’s wrong with it? I’m saying this a bit to something I heard in your question that suggests that under the surface there is a structure that’s just as solid as what you see above. I feel, no; what’s below is not in any way as solid. It’s not a committee – in Marxist terms, a committee of the ruling class – planning things or something like that. I take slight issue with C. Wright Mills, to whom obviously I owe a great debt, because he has set everything essentially on one level, the power elite, and the power elite would be capable of doing things. But what I’m talking about is much more nebulous in a sense.

Peter Phillips: I really understand what you’re saying, Peter. When I use the term power elite I imply that they’re setting broad parameters of what they want to do, protecting capitalism and that, perhaps being afraid because of civil unrest. But that the intelligence agencies and the deep state, people you’re talking about, do conspire in some capacity to help –

Peter Dale Scott: Yes, within an agency certainly and there’s a common mindset. All these people think the same way. They don’t have to have a –

Peter Phillips: That’s your culture of repression that you talk about.

Peter Dale Scott: Yes.

Peter Phillips: Specifically about 9/11, where you footnote [page 247, note 60] what you think were possible conspiracies related to that, could you elaborate on that?

Peter Dale Scott: Right. I’ll have to do it real quick. Some students of 9/11 think that the alleged hijackers are irrelevant. They argue, and it’s possibly true, that there were never any hijackers on the plane and so on. I don’t try to say what really happened – I‘m a real agnostic – but I think we should distinguish between whatever – the hijackers were involved in something and the embassy was involved with them and I believe the CIA was involved with them. And then you also had planes going into a building, but that might be a separate group of people, all in the deep state, of course. And I certainly do not believe that any Saudis were able to steer those planes into their targets. Then finally you have the phenomenon of the towers coming down and that may not have been foreseen by the people who steered the planes into the buildings. I say there may have been three. But that’s just a speculation.

Mickey Huff: Peter Dale Scott, there’s certainly a lot more to get into in The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil and the Attack on US Democracy. It’s a deep subject and we’d love to have you back sometime to talk more about this, but unfortunately we’re out of time.

I do want to note, however, that the last chapter in your book is called “Why Americans Must End America’s Self-generating Wars” and you end with some optimistic notes, which some people may have a hard time hearing during our conversation here now.

Peter Dale Scott: If you’re talking about government, it’s pessimistic. If you’re talking about America, there’s a lot more to America than its government.

Mickey Huff:  Absolutely. We want to end on that note and we want to say specifically here to immediately repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force. You also go on to say that we need “more information about the so-called state of emergency, progressively phase out the violent aspects of the so-called war on terrorism, reduce America’s bloated military and intelligence budgets and return to strategies for dealing with the problem of terrorism that rely primarily on civilian policing and intelligence.” And that’s what you sum up in part of your final chapter.

Our guest today has been Peter Dale Scott, author of The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil and the Attack on US Democracy. Learn more at  Peter Dale, any last words?

Peter Dale Scott: I just want to mention that my hopes for America are expressed at the end of the book in, after what Mickey just read, a poem in honor of Mario Savio, the leader of the FSM 50 years ago at Berkeley, who to me embodied what is greatest about the nonviolent tradition in America going back to Thoreau, which is far more American than what we’ve seen coming out of Langley and Fort Mead with the NSA and the CIA.

Mickey Huff: Indeed, Peter Dale Scott, we couldn’t agree with your more. Thank you so much for joining us today.

Recent books by Peter Dale Scott topically referenced in this interview:

The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil, and the Attack on U.S. Democracy (2014)

American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan (2010)

The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America (2007)

The War Conspiracy: JFK, 9/11, and the Deep Politics of War (2008 updated from 1972)

Peter Dale Scott: The American Deep State
The Deep State and the Fate of American Presidents Who Challenged it (1963-1980)
Deep State
The Doomsday Project, Deep Events, and the Shrinking of American Democracy
The Hidden Government Group Linking JFK, Watergate, Iran-Contra and 9/11
The Doomsday Project and Deep Events: JFK, Watergate, Iran-Contra, and 9/11
Systemic Destabilization in Recent American History: 9/11, the JFK Assassination, and the Oklahoma City Bombing as a Strategy of Tension
The Dulles Brothers, Harry Dexter White, Alger Hiss, and the Fate of the Private Pre-War International Banking System
The American Deep State, Deep Events, and Off-the-Books Financing
The State, the Deep State, and the Wall Street Overworld
Why Americans Must End America’s Self-Generating Wars
American War Machine: Deep History and the Global Drug Connection
50 Years After the Assassination of JFK: Why it Still Matters
The Pseudo-War on Terror: How the US Has Protected Some of Its Enemies
US Government Protection of Al-Qaeda Terrorists and the US-Saudi Black Hole
The NATO Afghanistan War and US-Russian Relations: Drugs, Oil, and War
NATO, Gladio and America’s Unchecked Security State (Parts I & II)
Peter Dale Scott: Rape In Libya?
Libya: The Human Costs of Washington’s Ongoing Collusion With Terrorists
Who Are The Libyan Freedom Fighters And Their Patrons?
Norway Terror as Systemic Destabilization

The Deep State, Secret Government, CIA, FEMA and the Doomsday Network: Interview with Peter Dale Scott

In this exciting and revealing special two hour Dark Journalist episode he welcomes University of California, Berkeley Professor and Former Canadian Diplomat Peter Dale Scott. Professor Scott has just released his controversial new book “The American Deep State,” which exposes the truth about covert forces that constitute an unelected, unaccountable, shadow government.

The “Deep State,” a concept that Professor Scott created over decades of research, posits that a secret system operates alongside the public state and utilizes intelligence contractors, the NSA, CIA assets, Wall Street, and corporate big oil funding to manipulate the public with what he refers to as “Deep Events,” such as 9/11, the Iran-Contra scandal and the JFK Assassination, for profit and control.

He also investigates an obscure official channel called the “Doomsday Network” which provides a blueprint for the mass detention of American citizens under shadowy plans like Rex-84, Project Endgame and the so-called “Continuity of Government” that involves FEMA emergency policies being utilized by the Deep State to get around public scrutiny. These plans also include a process for the suspension of the constitution and the implementation of martial law!

Together, Dark Journalist and Professor Scott will examine how drug trafficking is a corridor of funding for the Deep State and how journalist Gary Webb, the subject of the recent movie “Kill the Messenger,” was destroyed because he came too close to the truth. Webb was trying to reveal that Covert Intelligence operations were assisting the explosion of drugs in major US Cities.

Professor Scott explains how Deep Politics has been the dominant feature in presidential administrations regardless of the two-party system, from Kennedy to Reagan to Obama. He explains that there was a fierce battle with the public state which the Deep State won and now their militaristic vision is the norm in worldwide foreign policy. He goes even further and reveals a murky coalition of intelligence services, arms dealers and financial networks that colluded to influence global geopolitics called “The Safari Club.”

The American Deep State: An Interview with Peter Dale Scott
Peter Dale Scott: The American Deep State
The Deep State and the Fate of American Presidents Who Challenged it (1963-1980)
Deep State
The Doomsday Project, Deep Events, and the Shrinking of American Democracy
The Hidden Government Group Linking JFK, Watergate, Iran-Contra and 9/11
The Doomsday Project and Deep Events: JFK, Watergate, Iran-Contra, and 9/11
Systemic Destabilization in Recent American History: 9/11, the JFK Assassination, and the Oklahoma City Bombing as a Strategy of Tension
The Dulles Brothers, Harry Dexter White, Alger Hiss, and the Fate of the Private Pre-War International Banking System
The American Deep State, Deep Events, and Off-the-Books Financing
The State, the Deep State, and the Wall Street Overworld
Why Americans Must End America’s Self-Generating Wars
American War Machine: Deep History and the Global Drug Connection
50 Years After the Assassination of JFK: Why it Still Matters
The Pseudo-War on Terror: How the US Has Protected Some of Its Enemies
US Government Protection of Al-Qaeda Terrorists and the US-Saudi Black Hole
The NATO Afghanistan War and US-Russian Relations: Drugs, Oil, and War
NATO, Gladio and America’s Unchecked Security State (Parts I & II)
Peter Dale Scott: Rape In Libya?
Libya: The Human Costs of Washington’s Ongoing Collusion With Terrorists
Who Are The Libyan Freedom Fighters And Their Patrons?
Norway Terror as Systemic Destabilization

The CIA Against Latin America : The Special Case of Ecuador

“The United States seems destined by providence to plague America with misery in the name of liberty.” ~ Simon Bolivar




Ecuador Alerts Public to CIA Actions Across the Continent

The Foreign Ministry is backing a new book outlining CIA actions in Ecuador to raise public awareness of interventions committed by the organization.

Imprisoned on various occasions and subjected to numerous interrogations, Dr. Jaime Galarza Zavala is one of the estimated 120 direct victims of the CIA’s record in Ecuador.

Persecuted by the CIA for his political organizing, Galarza described to teleSUR English that “they told me that I was working as a guerrilla in the Dominican Republic. I, to this day, have never visited the Dominican Republic. But they accused me of being a guerrilla leader in the Dominican Republic. And this was a common theme with various interrogations.”

He added that, “while they interrogated me, there was somebody that called every now and then from another room. Afterward, they told me that this person they were talking with was a gringo, a North American, who never presented himself to me. But he gave them instructions as to how to continue the interrogation,” said Galarza.

A fierce critic of U.S foreign policy in the region, Galarza recently published a book titled, “The CIA Against Latin America, the Special Case of Ecuador,” co-authored by Francisco Herrera Arauz.

In an interview with teleSUR English on CIA actions in Ecuador, Herrera said,“First, they destroyed our democracy. Second, they worked with undivided attention against our citizens. They persecuted our citizens for thinking differently. People were killed, injured, there are victims of this violence, there are families that were harmed, there are exiles, the honor of some people has been ruined, there are destroyed families, and all of this was caused by the CIA’s actions.”

Both authors have previously interviewed Philip Agee, the ex-CIA operations officer whose name became internationally known when he wrote the book “Inside the Company: CIA Diary” in 1975, detailing his time working in Ecuador, Uruguay, and Mexico from 1960 to 1968 and denouncing actions undertaken by the CIA during this period.

In his testimonies of that period, Agee said that when he operated in Ecuador from 1960 to 1963, the CIA oversaw: the overthrow of two presidents; the infiltration of various political parties and organizations; and the planting of bombs in front of churches and other emblematic sites to frame leftist groups; among other actions.

At an event celebrating the new book, Ecuador’s Foreign Minister Ricardo Patiño said, “These secret policies continue in Latin America today. Nothing that Philip Agee denounced as CIA actions in the past have been discarded by the espionage seen in the present.”

To raise public awareness of the atrocities committed within Ecuador and the long-term damage caused by CIA interventions throughout Latin America, Ecuador’s Foreign Ministry has printed and widely distributed copies of the book in Spanish and English.

US State Department Admits Russia had Nothing to Gain from Killing Boris Nemtsov

CIA Incites Bloodshed in Venezuela

US Aggression Against Venezuela: The Facts

The American Fingerprints on Colombia’s Dead

Argentina’s Reconnaissance Work Against US and Israeli Spy Networks

Coup Plot Foiled in Venezuela

Is Boko Haram a CIA Covert Op to Divide and Conquer Africa?

Social Media Coup: The Vile Virality of Venezuela’s Opposition

The Politicization of the AMIA Investigation: Pretext for Regime Change in Argentina

Argentina: CIA vs. Cristina Fernandez

Nigeria: Unraveling the Mystery of Boko Haram

How the CIA Made Google: Inside the Secret Network Behind Mass Surveillance, Endless War, and Skynet

The CIA in Latin America: From Coups to Torture and Preemptive Killings

Washington, DC : Member of State Duma Presents Six Point Plan for Russian Regime Change

Blog at | The Baskerville Theme.

Up ↑


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,275 other followers