Friday 21st of September 2018

the CIA good fairy: the bad witch of the west...

witch of the west

The CIA in Indonesia...

 

Background from the CIA World Fact Book:

 

The Dutch began to colonize Indonesia in the early 17th century; Japan occupied the islands from 1942 to 1945. Indonesia declared its independence shortly before Japan’s surrender, but it required four years of sometimes brutal fighting, intermittent negotiations, and UN mediation before the Netherlands agreed to transfer sovereignty in 1949. A period of sometimes unruly parliamentary democracy ended in 1957 when President SOEKARNO declared martial law and instituted “Guided Democracy.” After an abortive coup in 1965 by alleged communist sympathizers, SOEKARNO was gradually eased from power. From 1967 until 1998, President SUHARTO ruled Indonesia with his “New Order” government. After street protests toppled SUHARTO in 1998, free and fair legislative elections took place in 1999. Indonesia is now the world’s third most populous democracy, the world’s largest archipelagic state, and the world’s largest Muslim-majority nation. Current issues include: alleviating poverty, improving education, preventing terrorism, consolidating democracy after four decades of authoritarianism, implementing economic and financial reforms, stemming corruption, reforming the criminal justice system, addressing climate change, and controlling infectious diseases, particularly those of global and regional importance. In 2005, Indonesia reached a historic peace agreement with armed separatists in Aceh, which led to democratic elections in Aceh in December 2006. Indonesia continues to face low intensity armed resistance in Papua by the separatist Free Papua Movement.

 

 

The reality:

 

vivere pericolosamente

Vivere pericoloso (or vivere pericolosamente) is a phrase in the Italian language, which means “to live dangerously”. Usually, the phrase is used for dangerous things, such as people living in dangerous areas because of recurring disaster.

In Indonesia, this phrase was popularized by Indonesia’s first president Sukarno in 1964 when his state address on the 19th anniversary of the nation’s independence was entitled Tahun Vivere Pericoloso (The Year of Living Dangerously, abbreviated as Tavip), roughly a year before the coup attempt by the 30 September Movement.

 

The title of the address inspired Christopher Koch’s book.

 

The Year of Living Dangerously” is the 1978 novel by Christopher Koch in which a male Australian journalist, Guy Hamilton, a female British diplomat, and a Chinese-Australian male dwarf interact in Indonesia in the summer and autumn of 1965.

Catholic-educated Koch believed in the existence of evil and was a traditionalist whose books dealt with themes of spirituality, illusion, reality, and cultural identity. He has been described as “an old fashioned writer” — and he did not like “postmodernism” in which fragmentation, paradox, and ambiguity progress the narration. Koch worked as a radio producer at the ABC in Sydney for 12 years, and was responsible for broadcasts to schools. The ABC transferred him to Indonesia in 1968 on a UNESCO assignment to organise radio facilities. His novel “The Year of Living dangerously” was successfully serialised for ABC radio and then made into a movie with Mel Gibson and Sigourney Weaver. Billy the dward was played by Linda Hunt, now playing another manipulative ethos character on NCIS Los Angeles.  

 

In a strange oppostion to Koch’s belief in evil, Billy the dwarf explained that the Indonesian wayang shadow puppet play — of the Buddhist legend of Prince Arjun and Princess Skrikandi — illustrated the Hindu belief that there is no right or wrong and that there are no final answers — one of the powerful concepts of Eastern religions.

Believing Guy to be a moral person, well-connected Billy helps him obtain interviews. Guy’s reputation as a journalist soars. Billy keeps photographs and notes about the people Guy meets, recording their character and life, and making up stories about their possible motivations. Guy discovers that Billy is also keeping a file on him as well, but decides to trust Billy anyway.

Billy introduces Guy to Jill Bryant, a beautiful young diplomat at the British embassy. Billy and Jill become close friends. Billy subtly manipulates events so that Guy and Jill continue to encounter one another. Guy falls in love with Jill. Jill is reluctant to begin a relationship with Guy because she has to return to the United Kingdom soon. But she relents, falls in love, and sleeps with Guy. 

Guy finds out that Billy is a strong supporter of the Sukarno regime, is concerned with the extreme poverty afflicting Indonesia, and is supporting a local woman and her child with food and money.

Jill’s diplomatic work is a cover for her real job, a spy for the British embassy. Jill is informed that the People’s Republic of China is secretly sending a shipments of weapons to Indonesia to arm the PKI (the communists in Indonesia). Believing that a revolution is about to occur, Jill tells Guy about the arms shipment in the hope that he leaves the country before civil war breaks out. But Guy, focused on his career, verifies the story and scoops the other journalists. Hurt that Guy placed his career before their relationship, Jill breaks up with him. Billy also ends his friendship with Guy after concluding that Guy has lost his moral compass. 

 

The situation was somewhat complex as of 1945 Sukarno was allied with the PKI (communists) to get rid of the colonial powers in Indonesia. Meanwhile, the CIA (with feed-back suggestion and communication with Washington) manouvered to weaken Sukarno’s alliance with the PKI, with various plots and double-crosses that would eventually lead to Suharto’s rise to power.

 

For example, on September 25 1957, President Eisenhower ordered the CIA to overthrow the Sukarno government. Soviet intelligence learned of this plans almost instantly. The Soviets exposed the “American Plot to Overthrow Sukarno” three days later, in the Indian newspaper, Blitz, which “Soviet intelligence controlled”. Despite being “outed”, the CIA began planning the coup, setting up operational bases, primarily in the Philippines. The CIA then employed veteran Filipino CIA paramilitary officers to make contact with Indonesian military forces on Sumatra and Sulawesi. Working in tandem with the Pentagon, deliveries of weapons packages were prepared for distribution to rebel military forces in Sumatra and Sulawesi. The CIA also supplied cash and radio stations that issued anti-Sukarno broadcasts.

 

--------------

Journalism is a funny beast, even in fiction. The dangers have been numerous then and still are today, not only for journalists but for all of us. Now the Australian government wants to help Indonesian government create 10 (ten) “Bali” style island resorts, whatever this means. Possibly corral an invasion of super-yobo Orstrayan to go there cheaply for spending money on expensive booze, get pissed in the sun, piss against the new coconut trees of five star hotels — or turn the infinity pools green. 

 

Here, one should read “The Napalm Bugle”... written by Ed Lacy and published in 1968... Armstrong, a former GI, runs a pacifist newspaper... This smells like trouble.

 

At times, the Sukarno regime was “supported by Russia”. Beforehand, just after WWII, the U.S. "had sympathy" for the people of Indonesia and supported their independence against the Dutch. A violent four year revolution in Indonesia eventually ended with Indonesia free from Dutch Rule. In Batavia (Jakarta) the ICEBERG mission provided US policymakers with information from the beginning of the revolution and how it evolved — possibly poked towards a result that suited the American Empire.

Colonel John G. Coughlin planned operation ICEBERG. He, along with the CIA (OSS at the time), wanted to establish field stations in key cities such as Singapore, Saigon, and Batavia. He had four person teams each with specialists in espionage, counterintelligence, research and analysis that would make up the core of US intelligence stations across Southeast Asia. Their responsibilities included collecting information about Japanese war crimes, assessing the condition of U.S. property holdings, and accepting the odd surrender from the Japanese soldiers and commanders.

 

We were advised that “only Nixon could go to China.” But Gough Whitlam, Prime Minister of Australia, went there in 1971, before Nixon (1972).  In 1944, nearly thirty years before these historic trips, the American military established the first liaison and intelligence-gathering mission with the Chinese Communists in Yenan. Named the Dixie Mission, the detached unit sent to Yenan was responsible for transmitting weather information, assisting the Communists in their rescue of downed American flyers, and laying the groundwork for an eventual rapprochement between the Communists and Nationalists, the two sides struggling in the ongoing Chinese Civil War.

 

Following extensive use of archival sources and interviews with the men who served in Yenan, Carolle Carter wrote a book that argues that while Dixie fulfilled its assignment, the members steered the mission in different directions from its original, albeit loosely described, intent. As the years passed, the Dixie Mission increasingly emphasized intelligence gathering over evaluating their Communist hosts’ contribution to the war effort against Japan. 

Some American politicians in the 1950s portrayed the participants in the Dixie Mission as too sympathetic to the Chinese Communists. During the 1970s many looked back at these individuals who ignored signs that could have prevented the “loss of China.” 

Carter debunked these simplistic portrayals to reveal a diverse and dedicated collection of soldiers, diplomats, and technicians who had ongoing contact with the Chinese Communists longer than any other group during World War II, but who became a largely unused resource during the Cold War.

 

In Indonesia, the Dutch certainly did not want the U.S. to establish any intelligence beach-head there. They complained that it wasn’t within “the sphere of influence” of the U.S.A. Tell the Dutch they were dreaming. They also argued there was no need for the U.S. intelligence because they would only come up with the same info that the Dutch and British had already acquired. Dream on! With the British (the double-crossers), the Dutch said that they would gladly inform the United States on anything they needed to know.  

Meanwhile, the British Southeast Asia Command (SEAC) had already given the go ahead for the U.S. spying in Batavia, so the Dutch had to allow the ICEBERG mission. Vice Admiral Lord Louis Mountbatten, one of Prince Charles relative, was the supreme allied commander of SEAC who created a committee called “P” Division.

The sole purpose of this “P” division was to keep a watch on what the U.S. was doing.

 

As an aside, Peter Wright, in his book Spycatcher — (Malcolm Turnbull, now Prime Minister of Australia, lawfully represented the publisher that defeated the British government’s suppression orders)  — claimed that in May 1968 Mountbatten attended a private meeting with press baron Cecil King, and the Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser, Solly Zuckerman. Solly, Baron Zuckerman OM KCB FRS, was a British zoologist, research pioneer and a scientific advisor to the Allies’ bombing strategy in the Second World War. He worked to advance the cause of nuclear non-proliferation, and on bringing attention to needy global economic issues. Wright alleged that up to 30 MI5 officers had joined a secret campaign to undermine the crisis-stricken Labour government of Harold Wilson (PM 1964-1970 and 1974-1976) and that Cecil King was an MI5 agent. In the meeting, King allegedly urged Mountbatten to become the leader of a “government of national salvation”. Solly Zuckerman pointed out that this was “rank treachery”, and the idea fizzled because of Mountbatten’s reluctance to act.

 

In post war Indonesia, ICEBERG was commanded by OSS Major Frederick E. Crockett who arrived to Batavia on September 15, 1945, only one month after Japan surrendered, ending WWII. Crockett then traveled to Java to head a two-team mission. Team A was located in the city of Batavia and their mission was espionage, counter-intelligence, research, analysis, radio operations and cryptography. Team B was located in Singapore, with the mission to back-up or replace Team A as needed. Crockett made sure that the collecting of political and economic intelligence was carried out in a discreet nature. This was because of the presence of the Dutch and British, whom he did not want to share his information with. The British and the Dutch disapproved of the OSS and of operation ICEBERG. 

The British managed to get Crockett removed from command after two months, claiming that Crocket had been uncooperative to the SEAC.

Crockett noted the opposite: the Brits had refused to give the OSS essential supplies, had commandeered OSS vehicles, and denied the OSS access to critical local funds. “Contrasted with wartime operations where as an American unit we were recognized as a part of a team with a mutual objective,” Crockett wrote in his conclusion, “the Batavia mission could at no time be considered a joint and cooperative mission”.

 

Following Eisenhower's 1957 order to the CIA to overthrow the Sukarno government, in February 9, 1958, rebel Colonel Maluddin Simbolon issued an ultimatum in the name of a provincial government, the Dewan Banteng or Central Sumatran Revolutionary Council, calling for the formation of a new central government against Sukarno. On February 15 this became part of a wider Pemerintah Revolusioner Republik Indonesia (PRRI or “Revolutionary Government of the Republic of Indonesia”) that included rebels led by other dissident colonels in East and South Sumatra and in North Sulawesi.

Sukarno aggressively opposed the rebels; he called upon his loyal army commander, General Abdul Haris Nasution, to destroy them. By February 21 forces loyal to Sukarno had been airlifted to Sumatra and began the attack. The rebel headquarters was in the southern coastal city of Padang. Rebel strongholds stretched all the way to Medan, near the northern end of the island and not far from Malaysia.

In April and May 1958, CIA proprietary Civil Air Transport (CAT) operated B-26 aircraft from Manado, North Sulawesi to support the rebels.

Military loyal to the central government of Sukarno launched airborne and seaborne invasions of the rebel strongholds Padang and Manado. By the end of 1958, the rebels were defeated. 

 

In a memorandum dated May 2, 1958, the US Board of National Estimates outlined the position of the Indonesian Communist Party, (PKI). Due to PKI support for Sukarno, the influence of Sukarno’s government was significantly increased. The PKI controlled several pro-government groups, expanded influence in rural areas, and possessed significant military strength. The opposition movement provided a reason for the PKI to strengthen ties and gain influence with Sukarno, bolstering Sukarno’s efforts against the opposition, and increasing the schism between Sukarno and western interests.

Fragmentation of non-communist groups also played a role in strengthening Sukarno. Indonesian political groups were very diverse. The non-communist Indonesian political groups were organized according to faith, gender, education, culture, and occupation.

The memorandum from May 2, 1958 points to the weakening of the Masjumi, a non-communist political party, which served as a powerful force to prevent Sukarno from connecting with the PKI. Due to the Masjumi’s fragmentation, its former strength or unity was not anticipated to return post-revolution.

Lastly, the May 2, 1958 memorandum points to the failure of Western support and inability to compromise on the West-Irian issue — a diplomatic conflict between the Netherlands and Indonesia over the territory of Netherlands New Guinea. While the Netherlands had ceded sovereignty to Indonesia on 27 December 1949 following an independence struggle, the Indonesian government had laid claims on the Dutch-controlled half of New Guinea on the basis that it had belonged to the Dutch East Indies and that the new Republic of Indonesia was the legitimate successor to the former Dutch colony. The lack of western compromise, the memo alleges, allowed exploitation of this issue by the PKI. The memorandum stated that following a revolution, Indonesia would view US support and motives with great suspicion, creating greater opportunities for the PKI and global communist interests.

The failed coup emboldened Sukarno. However the United Nations backed the formation of Malaysia from Indonesia’s northernmost territory. By 1965, Sukarno was decisively siding with communist interests.

 

A February 14, 1965 Indonesian memo outed a CIA agent, William Palmer. He lived in Puntjak, and was the head of the American Motion Picture Association of Indonesia (AMPAI), which was describes as a company that had “long brought imperialist films into Indonesia, particularly US imperialist films.” The world Hollywood syndrome...  The memo describes Palmer’s “true position” as that of a secret service agent, serving “the US imperialist government.” Not only was Palmer fingered as an undercover agent, but the same memo said that the US ambassador in Indonesia, Howard Jones, was also a CIA agent. The memo alleged collusion between Palmer and Jones. Palmer also hosted Allen Dulles (the third Director of the CIA and its longest-serving director) at his home, for a secret meeting. The memo cites as its source a periodical called Mainstream. According to the memo, Mainstream’s investigative journalists had discovered evidence that Palmer has been involved in many counter-revolutionary incidents, anti-Sukarno activities, among other “subversive assignments.” Mainstream accused Palmer of providing financial assistance to organizations and parties that can help “form a pro-US cabinet in Indonesia.” A week later, CIA Howard Jones denied any American involvement in anti-Sukarno activities or overthrow attempts. 

The Christian Science Monitor ran a story in 1985, suggesting that the Czech Disinformation Department may have been responsible for the story of Palmer being a CIA agent. A former deputy director of Czech disinformation operations, Ladislav Bittman, who had defected to the West in 1968, wrote in his book “The Deception Game” (exposing the activities of the Soviet agency in Prague that disseminated anti-American propaganda), that “the Czechs had no persuasive evidence that Palmer was a CIA employee and could only suspect him to be one.” 

 

Note: the Czech have a bad habit of sending false invoices to Gus. Who knows why? It’s highly probable that the Czechs have been at the source of the recent “Russian influence on the US presidential election” concept as payback for Trump’s unhidden wishes to enter in a relationship with Moscow. This should have made him the enemy of all USA’s voters, but enough of them still voted for him. 

 

Suharto’s rise to power started in his response to the 30 September “Army revolt Movement” of 1965. The inspiration for the 30 September 1965 Movement is to say the least, confusing, however the CIA claimed “it was not involved” and that it was a leftist plot, though in a memo, the CIA asserted that the Indonesian army was upset with Sukarno’s leftist tendencies and were looking to force Sukarno out of power, by possibly pushing the PKI, the communist party, to “attack the state” (the PKI becoming the enemy of Sukarno?) and responding with the "right-wing army? The 30 September Movement was a failure. The PKI was “influenced” by the CIA to brutally eliminate six Indonesian generals. Why? As an aside, in the French parliament, a French minister mentioned the rebellion (was it Muslim inspired?) had possibly been also designed to force a bond between west and east Pakistan (now Bangladesh). The French minister also spoke of the withdrawal of the US from Vietnam and of the rejection of east/west Pakistan’s demands. Mentions were made of CIA agents told to disguise themselves as Viet Cong and do things against the Vietnamese people in order to cause more hatred. 

Following the failed Movement and the assassination of the generals, Suharto used the event to sanction a crackdown on communists who were “deemed to be” behind the coup plot. Appointed by President Sukarno, Suharto had replaced General Yani who had been assassinated. Some army generals believed that Sukarno had approved the 30 September Movement coup so that there wouldn’t be any further opposition to communism. The whole thing was confusing. 

Political tensions appeared between Sukarno who seemed to be siding with communism and Suharto who took down anyone involved with the communist party. One should not dismiss the discreet influence of the Americans — an influence designed to muddle the political situation and fight communism in an underhanded manner. One Gus can see the hands of a CIA double-cross a mile away. One has to consider that in August, the Under Secretary of State, George W Ball, requested a Special National Intelligence Estimate (SNIE) on communism in Indonesia. The July NIE about Indonesia’s political conditions had been insightful, but Ball specifically wanted more information about communism and how a communist government would impact Indonesia and any surrounding or associating countries, especially in the Far East. This request was sent to DCI William F Raborn, for the SNIE to be prepared and submitted in September.

In November 1965, another coup was attempted (who by? The Communists? The army? US Mercenaries?) but also proved unsuccessful. According to the president’s Daily Briefs, Sukarno wanted to send a message to both military officials and the press. Sukarno wanted to make it clear that Indonesia was allied with the Communist axis that included North Vietnam, China, and Cambodia, and that their allegiance was against “American Imperialism.” He also wanted to make it known that the Indonesian media was slanderous of their regime, their party, and Communist governments. He minimized the effect of the coup and voiced further intent of resistance to the American forces. But Suharto (supported by the CIA) had been working against Sukarno.

By year’s end, Sukarno was overthrown in a military coup by General Suharto. The new military quickly went after everybody who was opposed to the new regime. Non-violent communist supporters, Indonesian women’s movements, trade union movement organizers and activists, intellectuals, teachers, land reform advocates, and the ethnic Chinese were all targeted. Over the course of about two years, it is estimated now by survivors, that as many as 2,500,000 of these people were massacred. The CIA’a World Factbook phrases it this way: “Soekarno was gradually eased from power.”

 

Sukarno’s balancing act of “Nasakom”  — nationalism, religion and communism — had unravelled. His significant pillar of support, the PKI, was effectively eliminated by the other two pillars — the army and political Islam. The army was on the way to unchallenged power. In March 1967, Sukarno was stripped of his remaining power by Indonesia’s provisional Parliament, and Suharto was named Acting President. In March 1968, Suharto was formally elected president.

 

The U.S. was very much involved with providing money, weapons, radios, and supplies to this new government. The United States wanted the Indonesian army to go after and remove the entire grass roots base of the leftist party. It is alleged that without the US financial support, the massacres would have been non-existent or less extreme. The US had bankrolled the whole process. According to an August 1966 airgram from Marshall Green stated that the U.S. Embassy prepared a list of Communist leaders and that list was used by Indonesian security officials who had lacked full-knowledge of some Communist officials.

 

As of 1967 the Soviet-Indonesian relation became strained. The USSR decided to suspended its economic and military aid to Indonesia. Indonesia in August 1967 joined Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines, and Thailand to form the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). This further strained the Indonesian-Soviet relationship.

 

General Suharto gave orders to wipe out every Communist in Indonesia. Every commander in the military was ordered to “clean up everything; send patrols out and capture everybody in the PKI.” Those that were captured were then given options to “surrender, support the government, or die.”

One of the first regions to feel the wrath of Suharto’s campaign against Communism was the district of Prambanan. In this area, Suharto’s soldiers went on hunts for suspected Communists. They would ask peasants if they were members of the PKI and the slightest suspicion led to capture or death. Thousands of people were rounded up. If they were to believed to be Communists, they were taken to a killing location, shot in the back of the head, tossed into a prepared hole that was dug, and then left to rot.

According to documentation declassified in the late 90s and released in 2001 pertaining to the Indonesian Army’s fight against the Indonesian Communist Party, the U.S. Embassy originally stated that 50 to 100 PKI members were being killed nightly. In an airgram to Washington in April 1966, the estimated fatalities had reached between 100,000 and 1,000,000.

The fight against the Indonesian Communist Party eventually led to President Suharto’s dictatorship from 1967-1998, marking 31 years of power.

 

It is interesting to know that a lot of air-combat planes in Indonesia are Russian-made Sukhoi and Mig with some American hardware as well. The Su-27 and Su-30 are equivalent to the US Raptors with less stealth capability but greater range, faster and more powerful armament — for a fraction of the cost. Even the Su-30, soon to be replaced by the Su-35, is superior to the not-yet-here “delicate” F-35.

 

In 1965, Barak Obama’s mother, Dunham, remarried to Lolo Soetoro from Indonesia. in 1967, Dunham took Obama with her to Indonesia to see his stepfather. In 1971, Obama returned to Hawaii, where he had been born in 1961.

 

Meanwhile, the CIA is still spreading its killing fairy dust around the planet...

 

Gus Leonisky

Your local CIA historian...

 

conjuring the US interests...

 

CIA operations follow the same recurring script. First, American business interests abroad are threatened by a popular or democratically elected leader. The people support their leader because he intends to conduct land reform, strengthen unions, redistribute wealth, nationalize foreign-owned industry, and regulate business to protect workers, consumers and the environment. So, on behalf of American business, and often with their help, the CIA mobilizes the opposition. First it identifies right-wing groups within the country (usually the military), and offers them a deal: "We'll put you in power if you maintain a favorable business climate for us." The Agency then hires, trains and works with them to overthrow the existing government (usually a democracy). It uses every trick in the book: propaganda, stuffed ballot boxes, purchased elections, extortion, blackmail, sexual intrigue, false stories about opponents in the local media, infiltration and disruption of opposing political parties, kidnapping, beating, torture, intimidation, economic sabotage, death squads and even assassination. These efforts culminate in a military coup, which installs a right-wing dictator. The CIA trains the dictator’s security apparatus to crack down on the traditional enemies of big business, using interrogation, torture and murder. The victims are said to be "communists," but almost always they are just peasants, liberals, moderates, labor union leaders, political opponents and advocates of free speech and democracy. Widespread human rights abuses follow.

This scenario has been repeated so many times that the CIA actually teaches it in a special school, the notorious "School of the Americas." (It opened in Panama but later moved to Fort Benning, Georgia.) Critics have nicknamed it the "School of the Dictators" and "School of the Assassins." Here, the CIA trains Latin American military officers how to conduct coups, including the use of interrogation, torture and murder.

The Association for Responsible Dissent estimates that by 1987, 6 million people had died as a result of CIA covert operations. (2) Former State Department official William Blum correctly calls this an "American Holocaust."

The CIA justifies these actions as part of its war against communism. But most coups do not involve a communist threat. Unlucky nations are targeted for a wide variety of reasons: not only threats to American business interests abroad, but also liberal or even moderate social reforms, political instability, the unwillingness of a leader to carry out Washington’s dictates, and declarations of neutrality in the Cold War. Indeed, nothing has infuriated CIA Directors quite like a nation’s desire to stay out of the Cold War.

read more:

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/CIAtimeline.html

 

see also: 

Porkie inc

 

going deeper or giving up?

 

A US army general has confirmed that Washington has decided to put an end to a CIA scheme to equip and train certain rebel groups fighting the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad. He insisted the policy shift had nothing to do with improving relations with Russia.

US Army General Raymond Thomas, head of the Special Operations Command, said the decision was "based on assessment of the program."

"At least from what I know about that program and the decision to end it, (it was) absolutely not a sop to the Russians," Thomas said at the Aspen Security Forum in Colorado on Friday.

READ MORE: No ‘complete confidence’ US arm supplies to Syria won’t end up with ISIS

Unnamed government sources told various media outlets last week that the decision to end the program had been partly due to the Trump administration wanting a better relationship with Russia.

The decision to terminate the program was reportedly taken by Trump in consultation with CIA Director Mike Pompeo and national security adviser H.R. McMaster ahead of his meeting with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin in Hamburg earlier this month.

READ MORE: Macron: Eliminating terrorist threat now more important than ousting Assad

But the end of the CIA's Timber Sycamore strategy was not a precondition for the ceasefire deal reached between Putin and Trump on the sidelines of the G20 summit, the US officials insisted.

"We are not the world’s cop; we are not a panacea." Commander Thomas explains the scope of US Special Operations at #AspenSecuritypic.twitter.com/8VNViCNuBw

— Aspen Security Forum (@AspenSecurity) July 21, 2017

 

The covert CIA program began arming and training the so-called moderate Syrian opposition forces in 2013.

Two US officials who spoke on condition of anonymity with Reuters, pointed out that the covert CIA tactic had produced little success...

 

Read more:

https://www.rt.com/usa/397153-cia-operation-syria-end/

 

Having investigated the CIA and illustrated the case of Indonesia above, not to mention the "Saddam has weapons of mass destruction" big disinformation campaign, Gus would be cautious in taking the change at face value. This could mean is that the CIA operation would be more discreet... In order for the instructions to the CIA change of heart be believed, the USA would also have to change their tune about Assad. Ms Haley should be removed from her job at the UN as well — and replaced by a more decent person.

 

a game changer?

President Donald Trump has ordered that the CIA begin to phase out its covert train-and-equip program in support of so-called “moderate” rebels fighting against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The program represented the tip of the spear of a larger goal of regime change that had been the official policy of the United States since September 2013, when President Obama declared “Assad must go” in the aftermath of a chemical attack in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta that killed hundreds of civilians. Through this action, President Trump is walking away from an established policy of America taking an active role in forcing the Syrian President’s ouster, willing instead to leave Assad’s fate in the hands of the Syrian people and its allies. The decision by Trump to terminate support for the “moderate” Syrian rebels, while not giving voice to a policy that rejects regime change in Syria, is the clearest signal yet that the United States has changed course on trying to force regime change in Damascus as a precondition for a political settlement of the Syrian crisis.  

The train and equip mission of the CIA in Syria can be traced back to the spring of 2011, when a revolution broke out in Libya against the dictatorial rule of Muammar Gadhafi. Backed by NATO airpower, anti-regime fighters were able to establish control over large areas inside Libya. The CIA began a program to train and equip these fighters, supplying weapons to Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, who in turn shipped these weapons to Libya, where they were turned over to Libyan rebels. (This circuitous route was chosen to avoid the U.S. being in violation of a UN embargo against weapons deliveries to Libya.)  

In August 2011, in the aftermath of the capture of the Libyan capital of Tripoli by rebel forces, Qatar began diverting arms originally intended for Libya to Turkey, where they were turned over to rebel forces that had, since June of 2011, been fighting against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. These rebels were grouped together under the umbrella of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), an ostensibly secular resistance group that  was in reality controlled by the Syrian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist organization that had been crushed by Bashar al-Assad’s father back in the early 1980’, and was operating in exile in Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan. While the CIA was not directly involved in this activity, CIA personnel in Libya and Turkey monitored these shipments to make sure no sensitive weaponry, such as hand-help surface-to-air missiles, made their way into Syria. This effort, which involved billions of dollars of arms, including those provided by the United States for the express purpose of aiding Libyan rebels, continued through 2012 and into 2013. (The U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, who was killed in an attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi in September 2012, was involved in coordinating these weapons transfers.)

As the fighting in Syria expanded in scope and scale, the number of anti-regime combatant organizations increased. The FSA took on an increasingly Islamist character, and many of its fighters defected to more extreme organizations, such as al-Nusra (an Al Qaeda affiliate). Many of the CIA-provided weapons being shipped by Qatar through Turkey made their way into these Islamist units, with the unintended result being that the U.S. was actively arming Al Qaeda and other extremist entities openly hostile to American interests. In an effort to control the flow of weaponry into Syria, President Obama authorized the CIA to formally take over the process of training and equipping Syrian rebels. This operation, known by its codename, Timber Sycamore, was run out of Turkey and Jordan with the full support of both governments.  

From 2013 through 2015, Timber Sycamore oversaw the purchase of billions of dollars of modern weaponry from Balkan suppliers, primarily in Croatia, and their shipment to ports in Turkey and Jordan, where the CIA, working with Turkish and Jordanian intelligence agencies, trained and equipped thousands of rebel fighters from more than 50 groups inside Syria that had been vetted by the CIA. The impact of this program on the fighting in Syria was significant—by the fall of 2015, the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad was teetering on the brink of collapse, largely due to the military pressure brought to bear on the regime by these U.S.-backed groups. The success of these rebels played a large role in triggering Russian military intervention in Syria in the fall of 2015, with Russian air power being unleashed against these very same rebels in an effort to save the regime of Bashar al-Assad. The Russian gambit worked, and by 2016 the Syrian military had reclaimed the initiative, recapturing the city of Aleppo and driving the U.S.-backed rebels back on all fronts.

The U.S. and its allies had no effective response to the Russian intervention. One of the reasons for this is the fact that there was little to differentiate the U.S.-backed rebels on the ground inside Syria from the more extremist fighters from al-Nusra and other Islamist groups. While the United States protested the Russian air strikes, it had to deal with the reality that Timber Sycamore was arming far more than just the so-called FSA. In both Turkey and Jordan, corrupt intelligence officers were siphoning off tens of millions of dollars in weapons and munitions, selling them on the black market, where they were bought by al-Nusra and, after 2014, ISIS. The U.S.-backed rebels would often sell or trade their US-provided weapons to both al-Nusra and ISIS, and in many cases, U.S.-trained fighters would defect with these weapons. Thousands of fighters serving under the banner of Al Qaeda and ISIS were, in fact, armed and trained by the CIA.

read more:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/say-goodbye-to-regime-ch...

blaming the media for its own incompetence...

The media’s “insatiable demand” for leaks is prompting the US intelligence community to anonymously disclose government secrets, according to CIA Director Mike Pompeo, who spoke after President Donald Trump blasted intelligence agencies for constant leaks.

“The media’s insatiable demand for leaks presents enormous risks to the United States of America,” Pompeo told the Washington Free Beacon.

“I am confident that this administration is going to do its level best, once the secrets are out, to identify those who did them,”Pompeo added. His comments came on the heels of President Trump saying that he wants leakers to be prosecuted.

Last week, Pompeo blasted The New York Times for publishing the name of the undercover officer in charge of the agency’s Iran operations.

CIA Dir Pompeo calls out @NYTimes for publishing name of an UNDERCOVER CIA agent.

Just as disgraceful?@BretStephensNYT REPEATS name 2x's! pic.twitter.com/wp9dUDmu1S

— Dan Scavino Jr. (@Scavino45) July 21, 2017

 

“It matters to me personally. We have CIA officers who will get killed as a result of these [leaks],” Pompeo said in the Free Beacon interview.

Leaks from the intelligence community have plagued Trump’s White House since he took office. They included information about his conversations with world leaders, as well as counterterrorism efforts.

US media have increasingly relied on anonymous intelligence sources for their reporting. And many of the leaks were used to attack President Trump.

After Trump’s conversation with Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, in May, intelligence sources leaked to the press that Trump discussed a terrorist threat to civil aviation with the diplomat.

read more:

https://www.rt.com/usa/397624-cia-pompeo-leaks-scaramucci/

obama fell the for CIA shit... (hillary helped a bit)...

 

Last week a Trump administration official decided to inform the news media that the CIA program to arm and train anti-Assad Syrian forces had been terminated. It was welcome news amid a deepening U.S. military commitment reflecting the intention to remain in the country for years to come. As my recent article inTAC documented, the net result of the program since late 2011 has been to provide arms to al Qaeda terrorists and their jihadist and other extremist allies, which had rapidly come to dominate the military effort against the Assad regime.

The Trump administration’s decision to acknowledge explicitly its decision to end the program invites a more systematic analysis of why and how such a program, which was so clearly undermining a fundamental U.S. national-security interest, could have gotten started and continue for so long. The preliminary version of the program that began in late 2011 is easier to explain than its more direct form two years later, which had continued (at least formally) until now.

One of the keys to understanding its origins is that the program was launched not because of a threat to U.S. security, but because of a perceived opportunity. That is always a danger sign, prompting powerful national-security bureaucrats to begin thinking about a “win” for the United States. (Think Vietnam and Iraq.)  

The opportunity in this case was the rise of opposition protests against the Assad regime in spring 2011 and the belief among national security officials that Assad could not survive. The national-security team saw a shortcut to the goal. Former Obama administration official Derek Chollet recalled in his book The Long Gamethat Obama’s advisers were all talking about a “managed transition” and urging Obama to publicly demand that Assad step down, according to Chollet. What that meant to Obama’s advisers was bringing pressure from outside, including providing arms to the opposition.

That was wishful thinking not only in regard to the willingness of an Alawite-dominated regime to hand over power to its sectarian foes, but in regard to the assumed Iranian willingness to go along with toppling the regime. Not one of Obama’s advisers had sufficient understanding of regional dynamics to warn the President that Iran would not allow their Syrian ally to be overthrown by an opposition supported by Sunni states and the United States.

But the decisive factor in pushing the administration toward action was the pressure from U.S. Sunni allies in the region—Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar—which began in autumn 2011 to press Obama to help build and equip an opposition army. Turkey was the leader in this regard, calling for Washington to agree to provide heavy weaponry—including anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles—to the rebel troops that didn’t even exist yet, and even offering to invade Syria to overthrow the regime if the U.S. would guarantee air cover.  

In the ideology of the national security elite—especially its Democratic wing—regional alliances are essential building blocks of what is styled as the U.S.-sponsored global “rules-based order.” In practice, however, they have served as instruments for the advancement of the power and prestige of the national security bureaucracies themselves. The payoffs of U.S. alliances in the Middle East have centered on the military bases in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar that allow the Pentagon and the military brass to plan and execute military operations that guarantee extraordinary levels of military spending. But enormous Saudi arms purchases and the financing of any covert operations the CIA doesn’t wish to acknowledge to Congress have long been prime benefits for those powerful organizations and their senior officials.

Then CIA Director David Petraeus was particularly interested in ginning up a covert operation to arm and train the Syrian opposition. With the security bureaucracies supporting the allies’ desire to unseat Assad, Hillary Clinton, whose sympathies and political strategy always lay with the war, eagerly took the lead to take the lead in the administration on arming the rebels and calling for a “no fly zone,” which the Turks badly wanted.  

Despite this set of interrelated factors pulling the administration toward a policy of regime change, Obama said no to heavy weapons, a no-fly zone, and an official U.S. role in arms supply. What he did agree to, however, was a covert CIA operation designed by Petraeus to load weapons from Libyan government stocks in Benghazi on ships and arrange for them to be shipped to the war zone. It was Obama’s way of placating all of the actors pushing for an aggressive policy of regime change in Syria without being publicly committed to regime change.  

read more:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-cia-and-allies-trapp...

 

Most of the dead (and refugees to Europe from this region) in Syria have been due to this inflation by the CIA of a conflict that would have soon been arrested — though the Saudis would also have been happy to fan the fire by supporting ISIS. see: http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/28653

Refugees to Europe from Africa have been due to the war set up in Libya by extremists supported by the US (Hillary Clinton's war) and that idiot Sarkozy (modern French Napoleon).

 

about the invasion of East Timor in 1975...

 

Archival documents show the British Government – like Australia and the U.S. – actively assisted Indonesia cover up crimes against humanity in East Timor. Dr Adam Henryreports.

In recent research in the National Archives (UK) regarding the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and East Timor, three things emerged repeatedly.

The first was that the British had clear information (both from their own sources) and by liaison with friendly Embassies (such as the Australian) on almost all events and developments inside East Timor before and after the Indonesian invasion of East Timor of 1975.

Second, the British (like their Australian counterparts) were very well informed about numerous human rights abuses committed by the Indonesian military during and after the invasion.

Thirdly, the British (like their Australian counterparts) were committed to undermining the question of East Timorese human rights in favour of expanding diplomatic and economic relations with Jakarta. Here we have an example of nations particularly fond of lecturing others about human rights knowingly and flagrantly enabling crimes against humanity (if not genocide) to occur. The United States, along with Australia, Britain, Japan, Europe, Canada and others, were committed to expanding ties with the Suharto regime — the perpetrators of great crimes. Indeed, the U.S. and UK (including Australia) maintained military ties, vital weapon sales and continuously provided diplomatic cover for the Indonesian military while it committed these crimes. Without such support – freely given and blatant in its near total ethical disregard for spirit of international law – the Indonesian military could never have seriously contemplated any war of aggression against East Timor, let alone a 25-year occupation claiming the lives of up to 200,000 men, women and children.

It is important to emphasise that the information about events in East Timor was most often highly accurate. This is not only demonstrated by the documentation with have in the present about what occurred between 1975 and during 1999 – when Indonesian authorities orchestrated one last crime against humanity following the independence referendum – but in the Australian, British and American archives. 

read more:

https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/evidence-of-b...

 

Read from top.

 

deeply concerned about the welfare of their citizens...

After WWII, the West had one huge ‘problem’ on its hands: all three most populous Muslim countries on Earth – Egypt, Iran and Indonesia – were clearly moving in one similar direction, joining group of patriotic, peaceful and tolerant nations. They were deeply concerned about the welfare of their citizens, and by no means were they willing to allow foreign colonialist powers to plunder their resources, or enslave their people.

In the 1950’s, the world was rapidly changing, and there was suddenly hope that the countries which were oppressed and pillaged for decades and centuries by first the European and then North American geopolitical and business interests, would finally break their shackles and stand proudly on their own feet.

Several Communist countries in Eastern Europe, but also newly liberated China, were actively helping with rapid de-colonizing process in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and other parts of the world.

Those developments were exactly what the West in general and both the U.K. and the U.S. in particular, were not ready or willing to accept. ‘Ancient’ belief in some sort of ‘inherited right’ to colonize, to loot and to control entire non-white world, was deeply engraved in the psyche of the rulers in both Europe and North America.

Peaceful, tolerant and socially oriented Islam was seen as a tremendous threat, at least in London, Washington, and Paris. It had to be stopped, even destroyed – resolutely and by all available means. Only the pre-approved Wahhabism, which was collaborative with the West and from the onset at least partially ‘co-produced’ by the British Empire, was singled-out and allowed to ‘bloom and succeed’.

READ MORE:

https://off-guardian.org/2017/08/20/the-world-remembers-64th-anniversary...

 

Read from top...

a nasty man working for nasty presidents...

 

Richard Helms, who died [in November 2002]... at age 89, was described by his biographer Thomas Powers as a "gentlemanly planner of assassinations." The epithet captured the essence of the former CIA director's style: socially correct, bureaucratically adept, operationally nasty. In mid-20th-century Washington, this combination proved effective, if not glamorous. Helms gained the confidence of presidents and the admiration of syndicated columnists. Yet ultimately his faith in political assassination was no small part of his fall from power to disgrace.

At a time when there is revived interest in using assassination as an instrument of U.S. foreign policy to deal with the likes of Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, Helms' career offers a cautionary epitaph: The assassination business has a way of ending badly.

Helms professed to be something of a skeptic of assassination. In Powers' biography, The Man Who Kept the Secrets, Helms is quoted as saying that assassination rarely achieved its expected goals. Yet once he took command of the American clandestine service in 1962, his prudence deserted him. President Kennedy and his successors wanted to use the tool of assassination, and Helms gave them what they wanted.

Leaving aside moral questions, his performance was far from impressive. Helms first turned to his good friend William Harvey, a brilliant, pistol-packing operative, who enlisted some of his friends in the Mafia to kill Fidel Castro. They proved unable to pierce Castro's security detail. In the summer of 1963, the deputy CIA director made another poor personnel choice. He activated contact with a disgruntled former hero of the Cuban revolution named Rolando Cubela. Known by his CIA cryptonym, "AMLASH," Cubela was a complex character. While he spoke of killing Castro, he was also loyal to the ideals of the Cuban revolution. Helms' counterintelligence staff advised caution, but Helms overruled them.

This homicidal conspiracy took on a more sinister aspect on Nov. 22, 1963, when President Kennedy was killed in Dallas. At the very moment Kennedy died, one of Helms' agents was delivering a poison pen to Cubela in Paris. The revelation of this coincidence in 1975 crystallized a wave of public indignation and revulsion that prompted Congress to slash the agency's budget and restrict its activities. 

Helms and his defenders bemoaned the conspiratorial bent of the American public, which often implicated the CIA in Kennedy's death. Yet Helms was hardly in a position to complain about conspiracy-mongering. He himself had been instrumental in the publication of the first JFK assassination conspiracy theory.

CIA files uncovered by a civilian watchdog panel in 1998 revealed what Helms sought to hide. In the summer of 1963, his top psychological warfare specialist in Miami, a dapper, multilingual lawyer named George Joannides, was slipping $25,000 a month to a group of anti-Castro Cuban exile students in Miami. When Kennedy was killed three months later, these same students, using CIA funds from Joannides, published a special edition of their newspaper, proclaiming that accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald had acted at Castro's behest. Dated Nov, 23, 1963, this broadsheet featuring photos of Castro and Oswald was the first concerted effort to articulate a conspiratorial explanation of Kennedy's death—and it was paid for out Dick Helms' budget.

Even a loyal CIA insider who worked with Helms concluded that the spymaster's actions encouraged suspicion of the agency. In 1963, John Whitten was a respected senior staffer whom Helms put in charge of reviewing all CIA files on Oswald. As an investigator, Whitten was appalled that Helms had not disclosed the Cubela/AMLASH plot to members of the Warren Commission, the blue-ribbon panel that probed Kennedy's death. Helms' actions, he said, were "morally highly reprehensible."

But no one knew about Helms' actions at the time. His ability to keep secrets meant that he was never held accountable. Even Cubela's arrest and conviction in March 1966, a propaganda bonanza for Castro, did not impede Helms' ascent in Washington. Three months later, he was named director of Central Intelligence.

Director Helms' willingness to countenance political murder on behalf of the White House continued to produce dismal results. In 1970, President Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger were disturbed by the emergence of a leftist democracy in Chile led by Salvador Allende. As the Senate Intelligence Committee later determined, the CIA reported that Chilean Gen. Rene Schneider was seen as a linchpin of the fledgling government, a respected military leader whose fidelity to constitutional principles was blocking a right-wing military coup. Helms, while skeptical, dispatched his top operatives to Chile, where they provided money and encouragement to two groups of officers who spoke of their intention to kidnap Schneider. A few days later, the general was mortally wounded during a kidnapping attempt by one of the groups. The next day, Helms commented that "the Chileans have been guided to a point where a military solution is at least open to them." The coup did not materialize at that time. But Chile's leftist democracy had been badly wounded.

Over the years, Helms stoutly denied that the CIA intended Schneider to die, but a congressionally mandated investigation in September 2000 revealed a telling epilogue. A few weeks after Schneider's death, one of his assailants made contact with the CIA. The agency responded by sending him $35,000—"to maintain the good will of the group." In September 2001, Schneider's two sons filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against Helms and Kissinger in Washington court. Helms' passing excused him from the indignity of having to defend his actions in court.

When President Nixon was struggling to cover up the White House role in the Watergate burglary in 1972, he sought Helms' help. "We protected Helms from one hell of a lot of things," Nixon said. But Helms refused to play ball, and Nixon forced him out as CIA director in January 1973.

Helms was soon back in the news for less savory reasons. In 1975, congressional investigators uncovered the Castro assassination plots. Testifying under oath, he told incredulous senators that the Cubela operation was not an assassination plot, a thesis refuted by the agency's own documents. Congress forbade the agency from engaging in assassination.

The agency's reputation has never recovered from the legacy of Helms' tenure. The revelations about Mafiosos and poison pens became etched so deeply in the American mind that stories involving rogue assassins and cynical CIA officials are now a Hollywood genre, impervious to refutation.

In 1977, Helms pleaded no contest in a federal court to misdemeanor charges of failing to testify fully before Congress about the CIA operations in Chile. "I found myself in a position of conflict," Helms said. "I had sworn my oath to protect certain secrets." As the New York Times noted, "For a man who considered himself a genuine patriot, it was a bleak note on which to end his professional career."

Yet in retirement Helms managed to rehabilitate himself. He defended his actions, saying accurately that he had merely carried out the wishes of the president. He worked the Washington social circuit, "lunching with influential media figures," as his Washington Post obituary discreetly noted. He made himself available to reporters and held court at agency events. He returned to respectability.

Since Sept. 11, pundits and politicians have urged Congress to lift its ban on CIA assassination of foreign leaders. But as the career of Dick Helms indicates, assassination rarely, if ever, advanced the interests of U.S. foreign policy or the security of the American people. Rather, assassination, even in the hands of a most accomplished spook, served mostly to encourage cynicism about the American government.

read more:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/obit/2002/11/the_gentlem...

See also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Helms

 

Porkie inc

 

and of course: 

http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/11276

 

 

the CIA and the muslim brotherhood love-in...

With the election of President Obama in November 2008 and his Muslim Outreach initiative, exemplified by his Cairo “A New Beginnings Speech” at al Azhar University, the Obama administration extended a welcome to the MB. Investor’s Business Daily noted the ensuing chronology of events, punctuated by the overthrow of the Mubarak regime in Egypt during the Arab Spring of 2011 that swept the heartland of the Muslim ummah.

2009: The White House invites ISNA’s president to President Obama’s inauguration ceremonies, even though the Justice Department just two years earlier had blacklisted the Brotherhood affiliate as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land trial — the largest terror-finance case in U.S. history.

2009: Obama delivers his Cairo speech to Muslims, infuriating the Mubarak regime by inviting Brotherhood leaders to attend.

2009: The White House dispatches top presidential adviser Valerie Jarrett to give the keynote speech at ISNA’s annual convention.

2009: Obama appoints a Brotherhood-tied Islamist — Rashad Hussain — as U.S. envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which strongly supports the Brotherhood.

2010: Hussain meets with the Brotherhood’s grand mufti in Egypt.

2011: White House sends intelligence czar James Clapper to Capitol Hill to whitewash the Brotherhood’s extremism. Clapper testifies the group is a moderate, “largely secular” organization.

2011: The Brotherhood’s spiritual leader — Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi — is given a hero’s welcome in Tahrir Square, where he raises the banner of jihad. Qaradawi, exiled from Egypt for 30 years, had been calling for “days of rage” before the rioting in Egypt. Before Obama’s Cairo speech, Qaradawi  wrote an open letter to the President arguing [Islamic] terrorism is a direct response to U.S. foreign policy.

2011: The Brotherhood vows to tear up Egypt’s 30-year peace treaty with Israel. Since Mubarak’s fall, it has worked to formally reestablish Cairo’s ties with Hamas and Hezbollah.

2011: Obama gives Mideast speech demanding Israel relinquish land to Palestinians.

2011: White House security adviser gives friendly speech at Washington-area mosque headed by ISNA’s new president.

2011: Justice Department pulls plug on further prosecution of Muslim Brotherhood front groups identified as collaborators in conspiracy to funnel millions to Hamas.

What is not well known is that the spread of the Muslim Brotherhood to the west was facilitated by the CIA during the Cold War Era as part of an anti-Soviet, anti-Communism initiative during the Eisenhower Administration. The creation of an Islamic Center in Munich, involved an ex-Nazi Turkologist, and former Nazi Muslim veterans from the Soviet Muslim satellites which were captured by advancing German forces during WWII in the Caucasus and Crimea. The CIA funded Hasan al Banna’s son-in-law to advance the MB cause via the World Muslim League.  This resulted in an MB beachhead in the US launched from the Munich Islamic Center.

read more:

http://www.newenglishreview.org/Jerry_Gordon/How_the_CIA_Helped_The_Musl...

 

Gus: what is not well-known as well is the the Muslim Brotherhood (formed in egypt in 1928 — possibly formed with the help of the US secret services of the time) was very friendly with the Nazis during WWII...

 

Meanwhile (or previously since this piece was written before the next revolution in Egypt when the Brotherhood was expelled from government):

In a recent video entitled "Days with the Imam" in which he recalls Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri declares that the founder of al Qaeda had been a "member of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Arabian Peninsula" before he was evicted in the 1980s. He was expelled because of his insistence on fighting alongside the mujahidin in Afghanistan while the Brotherhood allowed him to bring aid to Pakistan but didn’t want him to go any further. Zawahiri’s claims seem to have caused some embarrassment among the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), judging from how quick MB spokesman Mahmoud Ghozlan was to refute them. 

One reason for the embarrassment may be that, with a Muslim Brotherhood president recently elected in Egypt, the organization is eager to reassure the West of its moderate Islamist orientation and is therefore afraid of anything associating it with al Qaeda or jihadism. 

read more:

http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/10/03/osama-bin-laden-and-the-saudi-muslim-brotherhood/

 

NOTE: despite some minor differences in methods of operations and assassinations, Daesh and the Muslim Brotherhood are brothers-in-arm... The link with the CIA is very puzzling and go back to the days of Nasser who took over the Suez Canal. Nasser and the Muslim Brotherhood did not see eye to eye, as Nasser was a strong secularist...

one of the worst mass murders of the 20th century...

Thirty thousand pages of files have been released on US activities in Indonesia during the archipelago’s gory transition from a socialist dictatorship to a pro-West military dictatorship in the mid-60s. The documents confirm that Washington was aware of, and supported, the military takeover of the government and purge of communist opponents.

The anti-communist purges in 1965 and 1966 were horrific, described by the CIA as "one of the worst mass murders of the 20th century." Between 400,000 and 1 million accused leftists were killed, with some estimates going as far as to place the figure at 3 million.

It has long been known that the US and allied governments supported the 1965 military takeover. The US embassy, as well as the CIA, have been accused of providing weapons, economic assistance, and training to Suharto's forces as well as lists of names of 5,000 communists. The embassy asserted in 1990 that the list in question was compiled by a single official acting on his own direction, and scholars debated whether or not the US helped facilitate the mass killings.

read more:

https://sputniknews.com/asia/201710191058357817-indonesia-communist-mass...

We've been on the story since July on this site... way before by Gus...

Read from top...

not just a consideration...

If you read from top, you would read about something that's news today (!) but that we exposed quite a while ago: The CIA "considered" to assassinate Sukarno... Rubbish... No, the CIA had been ordered to get rid of Sukarno by whatever means by President Ike Eisenhower. From top you would read that Sukarno was helped by the communists to get rid of the Dutch colonialists, but thereafter the USA wanted to break this alliance. It took ten years for the CIA to replace Sukarno with Soharto.

----------

Jakarta: One of the daughters of Indonesia's first president has called for the US to apologise after the release of a "top secret" document from 1975 that reveals the CIA considered assassinating Sukarno during the Cold War.

The document – a summary of an investigation into CIA involvement in plans to assassinate foreign leaders – was among 2800 previously classified files related to the assassination of President John F Kennedy that were released last week.

Read more:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/cia-considered-assassinating-former-indonesi...

the CIA and the trade unions...

by Olav Boye translated from Norwegian by Terje Maloy

The CIA is the infamous, criminal intelligence agency which is the mastermind behind a long series of attacks on legal, elected political leaders and massive interventions to create chaos in countries [that] are in the United States’ bad books. By creating conflicts with help of paid agents and assassinating political leaders, they have fomented violent regime changes in numerous countries, Now it has the reputation of being a violent organization which is in the service of the US political leadership. The list of its criminal activities is long, but no one is punished for these crimes.

The CIA is heavily involved in the area of organized labour. Their aim is to sabotage trade unions and to hinder their the battle against negative globalization and abuses from multinational corporations and global financial institutions. The main labour union in the United States, the AFL-CIO, is the backer of American Institute for Free Labor Development – AIFLD, an organization which has supported right wing unions and political organizations, especially in Latin-America. Amongst other things, the AFL-CIO cooperated with the CIA and AIFLD to subvert and overthrow Salvador Allende, the democratically elected president in Chile, and his leftwing government.

AFL-CIO is the backer of international ‘Solidarity Centres’ that exists in 60 countries around the world. My experience with this from Macedonia was an aggressive interpreter who misinterpreted and constantly interrupted my lecture to an assembly from the Cultural Workers Union. My lecture was an orientation on the market liberalism in the European Union and globalization, where my opinion was that this greatly harmed the trade union movement’s struggle for political and professional rights. The interpreter was employed by the Solidarity Centre in Skopje, the capital of Macedonia, after her education in Florida. She claimed that people like me were communists and were destroying the labour movement. These claims were debated in the assembly, but the audience demanded a new interpreter. Solidarity Centres buy trust in the labour unions with amongst other things free computers and money grants. Here we can see the infiltration from the AFL-CIO – or the AFL-CIA, as some people like to call them.

During Ronald Reagan’s presidency the AFL-CIO was given substantial economic support from NED, the National Endowment for Democracy, one of CIA’s front organizations. In the Third World, they were better known for undermining activist trade unions than for their support of the labour movement’s professional and political struggle.

One example is the support to Lech Walesa’s Solidarity-movement in Poland. Human rights organizations both inside and outside of the US have accused the NED of «interference in other countries’ internal matters». There have also been accusations that entire organizations were created to legally continue the CIA’s support to political actors in countries where the agency was banned from operating, and that it therefore is the «heir» to CIAs covert work.

One fact frequently mentioned is that because the foundation is private, it is possible for it to operate freely where governmental agencies are bound by US laws. According to the Columbian journalist and writer Hernanado Calvo Ospina, this view was confirmed to a large extent by the foundation’s first director, Allen Weinstein, in an interview with Washington Post in 1991, where he stated that “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.”

Through my work with the international labour movement, I have on several occasion been approached by people who directly or indirectly tried to recruit me to their negative activities. By this I mean CIA-agents amongst labour leaders in ITUC based in Brussels, and Germans from the Friedrich Ebert Foundation (FES), which we know was, and possibly still is, financed by the CIA.

We can also look at the Ola Teigen-affair in the late 1960s, when money from the CIA went to The International Union of Socialist Youth, the international organization the biggest political youth organization in Norway, The Workers’ Youth League, belongs to. Of course the money went via the Friedrich Ebert Foundation. It is commonly known that the George Soros’ Open Society Foundation is in the same business, to great harm for all communist and socialist trade unions.

After the so called Carnation Revolution in Portugal in the mid 1970s, when leftwing officers seized power from the fascist government, I was hired by the Worker’s Educational Association AOF to run seminars in cooperation with Portuguese trade unions. I lived in Portugal for several months, arranging seminars and meetings, and afterwards we jointly selected people for further education at the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions’ own school in Sørmarka. During a seminar in Porto, I noticed that two guys were sitting in the back of the room. They were not participants, and during the break I asked them who they were. They represented the German Friedrich Ebert Foundation (FES), and had the same mission as I, to train trade unionist cadres.

When I arrived in Lisbon a few days later, I was contacted by a representative from the Norwegian embassy, who informed me that I had been taken off the mission and was going home. Later I got to know why. During the meeting in Porto, a construction worker had asked me if they should organize a broad trade union movement for all political groups, similar to the Nordic countries, or if they should have an ideological split like in Spain, where socialists, communists and Catholics each had their own trade union. My answer was that a broad union movement is preferable. The guys from the Friedrich Ebert Foundation did not like to hear this, since they were in Portugal to fight communists and radical socialist. It has long been well known that FES was financed by the CIA and that their mission was to make sure the labour movements in Germany and other places in Europe did not get radicalized or would become obstacles to the imperialist policies of the EU and the United States.

After the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, I, as secretary for the Nordic Graphical Union, was sent to Sarajevo to strengthen the Graphical Trade Union in this war-torn country. The Friedrich Ebert Foundation was of course also active here, to steer the political direction of the Bosnian trade unions. Here it was not a matter of cooperation, but of diktat from FES and the global trade union ITUC. They had an admitted CIA-agent, Rudy Porter, in their headquarters in Brussels, supposedly representing American trade unions. The representative of FES in Sarajevo, who was under Porter, was highly critical of my negative attitude to globalization and the EU’s market liberalism, which I freely discussed with my Bosnian colleagues. He claimed I was dead wrong and wanted me to join his team, to stop communists and socialist from getting any power in the labour movement in the former Yugoslavia. On commission from the graphical unions in the Nordic countries, I continued our positive work to rebuild the Graphical Union Organization in Bosnia.

In December 1999, I received a phone call from the leader of LO, the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions, who asked me if I wanted to accept a mission in Montenegro. It was on behalf of the general secretary of the ITUC, Bill Jordan, an splendid British trade unionist whom I knew previously from my work as secretary general of the Graphical International Union IGF. He wanted me to do some work in cooperation with the trade union in Montenegro. I asked for some time to consider the offer and called an American friend of mine in the ITUC. He went out to a phone booth on the street to call me back and tell me that I would be working under the CIA and the same Rudy Porter who I had met in Sarajevo. He was now responsible for the ITUC’s entire work in the Balkans and still got his payslip from the CIA, according to my colleague. I told the Norwegian trade union leader about this connection, and declined the offer to work with the trade union in Montenegro under such conditions.

CIA and the organizations which collaborate with it organize political criminal operations in a number of countries, including Norway. The trade union movement is an important target for the CIA and their political masters.

Their target is that trade unions won’t fight against multinational corporations, global financial institutions, powerful lobby groups and other opponents of trade unions. There can be no doubt that the CIA works systematically to subvert trade unions and political parties on the left, as more people than me can document. They have to a large degree succeeded – globally, in Europe, as well as in Norway.

Olav Boye is former secretary general of the International Graphical Federation. Translated by Terje Maloy.The article is Creative Commons for non-commercial purposes.

 

https://off-guardian.org/2018/03/06/how-the-cia-infiltrates-trade-unions...

black sites...

The secret American "black site" for interrogating suspected terrorists in Thailand was known to the CIA as "Detention Site Green" but for its first detainee, it was decidedly white.

Four halogen lights blasted the white walls 24 hours a day, according to Steve Coll in his book Directorate S, about the Pakistani spy service and those it arrested.

At other times, alleged terrorist Abu Zubaydah was kept in a coffin-sized box for hundreds of hours and waterboarded until he passed out, according to the Washington Post.

"Interrogation techniques such as slaps and "wallings" (slamming detainees against a wall) were used in combination, frequently concurrent with sleep deprivation and nudity," stated a US Senate report in 2014.

The Thai interrogation site is back in the news after Donald Trump's nomination of Gina Haspel to become the new head of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

Ms Haspel is widely reported to have overseen operations at the secret site, codenamed Cat's Eye.

"Gina Haspel … briefly ran a secret CIA prison where terror suspects Abu Zubayadah and Abd al Rahim al-Nashiri were waterboarded in 2002," according to current and former US intelligence officials who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

 

Read more:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-15/torture-and-secrecy-in-thailand-un...

disturbing?...

Directorate S: The C.I.A. and America’s Secret Wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Steve Coll, Penguin Press, 784 pages

Twelve days after 9/11, on the night of September 23, 2001, the CIA’s Islamabad station chief, Robert Grenier, received a telephone call from his boss, Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet. “Listen, Bob,” Tenet said, “we’re meeting tomorrow at Camp David to discuss our war strategy in Afghanistan. How should we begin? What targets do we hit? How do we sequence our actions?”

Grenier later wrote in his book, 88 Days to Kandahar, that while he was surprised by the call he’d been thinking about these same questions—“mulling them over and over and over,” as he later told me—so he was ready. President George Bush’s address to the U.S. Congress just a few days before, Grenier told Tenet, was a good start: demand that Afghanistan’s Taliban ruler, Mullah Omar, turn bin Laden over to the United States. If he refused, the U.S. should launch a campaign to oust him. Grenier had thought through the plan, but before going into its details with Tenet he abruptly stopped the conversation. “Mr. Director,” he said, “this isn’t going to work. I need to write this all down clearly.” Tenet agreed.


Grenier set to work, and over the next three hours he laid out the battle for Afghanistan. Included in the paper was a detailed program of how the CIA could deploy undercover teams to recruit bin Laden’s enemies among Afghanistan’s northern Tajik and Uzbek tribes (an uneasy coalition of ethnic militias operating as the Northern Alliance), supply them with cash and weapons, and use them in a rolling offensive that would oust the Taliban in Kabul. With U.S. help, which included deploying American Special Forces teams (under CIA leadership) coupled with American airpower, the Northern Alliance (more properly, the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan) would start from its Panjshir Valley enclave in Afghanistan’s far northeast and, recruiting support from anti-Taliban forces along the way, roll all the way into Kabul.

Grenier gave the eight-page draft paper to his staff to review, then sent it to Tenet in Washington, who passed it through the deputies committee (the second-in-command of each of the major national security agencies), then presented it to Bush. “I regard that cable,” Grenier wrote, “as the best three hours of work I ever did in my twenty-seven-year career.”

Three days after the Tenet-Grenier telephone conversation, on September 26, the CIA landed a covert-operations team in Afghanistan to recruit local allies in the hunt for bin Laden. The quick action was impressive, but then events slowed to a crawl. It wasn’t until October 20 that the first U.S. Special Forces team linked up with anti-Taliban rebels, and it took another week for U.S. units to land in strength. But by early November al Qaeda was on the run and the Taliban’s grip on the country was slipping away. On November 13, militias of the Northern Alliance seized Kabul. The Taliban was defeated, its badly mauled units fleeing south and east (its last bastion, in the south, fell on December 6), and into nearby Pakistan, while what remained of al Qaeda holed up in a series of cave complexes in the Spin Ghar mountain range of eastern Afghanistan.

By almost any measure, the CIA-led anti-al Qaeda and anti-Taliban offensive (dubbed Operation Enduring Freedom by George Bush) marked a decisive victory in the war on terror. The U.S. had set out a plan, marshaled the forces to carry it out, and then seen it to completion.

 

Read more:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/colls-directorate-s-is-d...

 

Not "disturbing" if you know how the CIA operates...

Read from top.

do not disturb the muck?...

Australian intelligence operations that took place during the Indonesian occupation of East Timor should stay secret, the head of the country's overseas spy agency will argue today.

Key points:
  • Academic Clinton Fernandes has been fighting for access to ASIS records on East Timor
  • Australia's spy chief is scheduled to appear at a tribunal to explain why ASIS does not want the documents made public
  • The documents in question relate to Australia's covert operations during the Indonesian occupation of East Timor in the 1970s

 

In what is believed to be a first, Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) director-general Paul Symon is scheduled to appear at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to put forward his organisation's case.

The spy chief's testimony is in response to Canberra-based academic Clinton Fernandes, who has battled since 2014 for access to the 40-year-old ASIS records on East Timor.

At first ASIS and the National Archives insisted that they could not even confirm or deny whether such records existed, claiming that to do so would cause damage to Australia's "security, defence or international relations".

Professor Fernandes challenged this position in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, and in February the National Archives backed down, conceding it did in fact have such records.

But National Archives insisted it and ASIS needed up to a year to examine the documents to consider whether they could be released.

"It was common knowledge that Australia was involved in East Timor and was very interested in Indonesia in the 1970s," Professor Fernandes told the ABC.

"To say that even a confirmation that ASIS records exist would harm national security seems ridiculous to me.

"We hope in the proceedings to ask questions that make [ASIS director-general Paul Symon] justify why on national security grounds these materials should continue to be withheld 43 years after the event."

 

Read more:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-27/asis-chief-to-front-tribunal-to-ke...

 

Why?  Read from top...

syria: 60 years of conspiracies from the west...

Documents show White House and No 10 conspired over oil-fuelled invasion plan

Nearly 50 years before the war in Iraq, Britain and America sought a secretive “regime change” in another Arab country they accused of spreading terror and threatening the west’s oil supplies, by planning the invasion of Syria and the assassination of leading figures.

Newly discovered documents show how in 1957 Harold Macmillan and President Dwight Eisenhower approved a CIA-MI6 plan to stage fake border incidents as an excuse for an invasion by Syria’s pro-western neighbours, and then to “eliminate” the most influential triumvirate in Damascus.

The plans, frighteningly frank in their discussion, were discovered in the private papers of Duncan Sandys, Mr Macmillan’s defence secretary, by Matthew Jones, a reader in international history at Royal Holloway, University of London.

Although historians know that intelligence services had sought to topple the Syrian regime in the autumn of 1957, this is the first time any document has been found showing that the assassination of three leading figures was at the heart of the scheme. In the document drawn up by a top secret and high-level working group that met in Washington in September 1957, Mr Macmillan and President Eisenhower were left in no doubt about the need to assassinate the top men in Damascus.

 

Read more:

https://off-guardian.org/2018/05/15/guardian-archive-2003-macmillan-back...

Read from top.

US empirium...

From the moment it took power in the U.S. in 2009, the Barack Obama Administration was angling to overthrow Syria’s President, Bashar al-Assad. And then, by the time of December of 2012, Obama’s team were relying mainly on Al Qaeda’s Syrian branch to lead the tens of thousands of the U.S.-Saudi alliance’s boots-on-the ground ‘moderate rebels’ in this overthrow-Assad war, fighters who have actually been fundamentalist Sunnis recruited from all over the world to come to Syria in order to replace the secular President of Syria, the Alawite Shiite, Assad. Propaganda in the U.S. portrays U.S. Government policy as being driven by a concern for the welfare of the Syrian people: to ‘protect their human rights’ — not to overthrow a government that refuses to cooperate with U.S. oil companies and other corporate interests in the U.S.

But even with the anti-Obama Donald Trump in the White House, there has been nothing really new about any of this U.S. Government scam, any of this attempted-but-never-publicly-acknowledged conquest against the Syrian people. The U.S. Government — along with the U.S.-aristocracy-allied fundamentalist Sunni Saud family, the world’s wealthiest family, who own Saudi Arabia, and who finance the fundamentalist-Sunni Al Qaeda and similar Sunni jihadist organizations — has been trying ever since 1949 to control Syria, and still tries. The main difference between now and 1949 is that the Saud family have become more brazen about conquest than they were, back in 1949, when they had wanted merely that the Syrian Government approve an American-built pipeline for their oil to go into Europe. In the present day, the Sauds are openly at war against Shiites everywhere, even inside Saudi Arabia itself, and are bombing the hell out of the Shiite (Houthi) areas of Yemen, basically trying to take over the entire Middle East, and to destroy Iran, which is the leading Shiite country. The U.S. is allied with the Sauds in all of this.

On 30 March 1949, the CIA, in a coup planned by James Hugh Keeley Jr. and Miles Copeland Jr., replaced the democratically elected Syrian President Shukri al-Quwatli, replaced him with France’s stooge, General Husni al-Za’im, who displeased King Saud of Saudi Arabia, and so got overthrown and killed on 14 August 1949, by a different France-stooge General, Sami al-Hinnawi. Za’im had left his mark on Syria, however:

The pro-Western Za’im remained in power for three months — long enough to grant [the Saudi-American] Aramco’s Tapline concession to pipe Saudi oil to the Mediterranean.”

But Hinnawi pleased the CIA and Sauds even more than Za’im did, so got the Presidency, and Za’im simply got killed. (The CIA and the Saud family are very demanding of their stooges.)

In December 1949, the CIA, in a coup planned by Miles Copeland (Syria’s third and final coup that year), carried out the desire of King Saud, and installed as Syria’s leader, Adib Shishakli.

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia implemented a new policy towards Syria by giving financial support amounting to six million dollars.”

Shishakli’s barbarism was so great that four years later, Syria’s generals formed the secular Ba’ath Party and on 6 September 1955, restored to power Syria’s democratically elected President, Quwatli, who in 1958 joined Syria into the United Arab Republic, which lasted till 1971. However, while Quwatli was still Syria’s President, the CIA, yet again, in 1957, tried to oust him via a coup, but that coup-attempt had to be called-off.

A permanent result of that brazen attempt in 1957 was to cause Syria to sever relations with the U.S.; so, from that time forward, the U.S. regime works in Syria mainly by its agents and allies, such as King Saud who owns Saudi Arabia, and Emir Thani who owns Qatar. Both families are fundamentalist Sunni Arabs — the Saud family being Al Qaeda’s main financial backer, and the Thani family being the Muslim Brotherhood’s main financial backer. (Both Al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood are fundamentalist Sunni organizations, whereas Syria, at least after 1957, is strongly secular, anti-sectarian.) But now that King Saud wants to overthrow Emir Thani and take Qatar, and is trying to blockade Qatar, the U.S. regime has stayed with King Saud, but not to such an extent as to jeopardize Emir Thani’s willingness to host in Qatar America’s biggest Middle Eastern military base, Al Udeid Air Base, which the Thanis see as essential to their staying in power. So: the U.S., under Donald Trump, is mildly supportive of King Saud’s aggressions against Qatar, but not to such an extent as to withdraw from Al Udeid.

As a result of the Sunni Sauds’ attacks against the Sunni Thanis, the Thanis have turned away from the Sauds, who hate Iran and all Shiites. Thus, the Thanis now are non-partisan in the Sauds’ longstanding efforts to conquer Iran and other Shiite-majority areas; the Thanis have become more pan-Arabic than when they were allied with the Sauds; they’re no longer dedicated to war against Shia. They are no longer allies of the Sauds against Shia.

The U.N. ‘peace’ talks on Syria are between Syria’s Government and Saudi Arabia’s Government, not between Syria’s Government and any authentically representative native Syrians versus the Syrian Government. The Saud family selected the “High Negotiations Committee” who are negotiating against Syria’s Government there, as ‘representatives’ of ‘the opposition’. Even the U.S. subscription-only GlobalSecurity.org site admits:

The High Negotiations Committee is a Saudi-backed coalition of Syrian opposition groups. The High Negotiations Committee (HNC) was created in Saudi Arabia in December 2015.”

Non-sectarian — even secular — Syria is the odd-man-out, insisting on its own national sovereignty, and secularism, no matter what, and willing to do whatever they must in order to maintain their independence. And the majority of the Syrian people thus support Assad (55% did, even at the very height of the ‘Arab Spring’ uprisings throughout the Arab world), and 82% of Syrians blame the U.S. Government for the presence of ISIS and other jihadists in their country.

This is history. What can the U.S. regime credibly present to the world as being justification for continuing its decades-long effort to conquer Syria? The U.S. regime condemns Syria’s non-sectarian Government for ‘humanitaian violations’ fighting against the U.S.-Saudi imported terrorists who are trying to overthrow and replace Syria’s Government. The U.S. has thousands of its own troops in their invasion and military occupation of Syria, and condemns Assad for leading the fight against that invasion-occupation.

As regards Ukraine, you can either see this terrific video-compilation documenting how Obama perpetrated a bloody coup which in February 2014 overthrew and replaced Ukraine’s democratically elected Government, or you can read my “Are Michael Isikoff And David Corn CIA Agents?” which documents the lies by those two ‘investigative journalists’, who spread the falsehoods about Ukraine that the U.S. aristocracy want to be spread against Russia, and which lies go against the realities that that video shows.

Incidentally, on 10 February 2017, in the video shown here, Isikoff interviewed Bashar al-Assad, who took his stenographed transmission of quite possibly fabricated ‘evidence’ against Assad, and turned it instead against the regime whose agent Isikoff so clearly does represent.

Obama’s coup destroyed Ukraine. The World Happiness Reports, from the U.N. and Columbia University, have been published for 2013, 2015, 2017, and 2018. Each year’s report covers, generally speaking, the surveys that were done worldwide during the preceding year. The American coup in Ukraine occurred in February 2014. So, the only pre-coup survey done was the 2013 publication, which covered the year 2012. As internationally ranked for happiness by the World Happiness Report, Ukraine went from #87 out of 156 nations, or 87/156 (the bottom 45%) in 2013, to 111/138 (the bottom 20%) in 2015, to 123/157 (the bottom 22%) in 2016, to 132/155 (the bottom 15%) in 2017, to 138/155 (the bottom 12%) in 2018. So: before the coup, Ukraine was in the worst 45%, but by 2018 it reached the worst 12%. That’s an enormous plunge. Barack Obama wanted the coup, he got it, and it destroyed Ukraine. The U.S. claims to be trying to save Ukraine from Russia, but the reality is the exact opposite: that the U.S. destroyed Ukraine in order to become enabled to bring Ukraine into NATO and position U.S. nuclear missiles less than ten minutes flight-time from Moscow. Ukrainians have every reason to hate the U.S. Government, for what it did to them. Like what it did to Afghans, and Iraqis, and Yemenese, and Hondurans — and Chileans, and Guatemalans, and so forth. And like what it’s doing to anyone who wants to avoid World War III — including the American people, who nominally (but not really) are represented by this rapacious Government, controlled by this rapacious aristocracy.

So: the documentation is unequivocally clear, that the U.S. Government lies shamelessly about both Syria and Ukraine — and Russia, and Iran, and much else.

 

Read more:

https://off-guardian.org/2018/07/09/how-the-u-s-government-lies-about-sy...

map

To this map, other countries in Europe such as France and Germany have been "roughed up" by various US means — political, financial and entertainment (including some Hollywood products "made for the European market") in order to get them to comply to the US wishes. It's only under Sarkozy that France "rejoined" NATO (2009). As well Indonesia, Canada and Mexico should be added to the map.

Russia nearly fell to the US (West) tricks in 1998. Had Putin not been a "tyrant" (which he is not), by this I mean an intelligent man who knew the tricks — AND THE OUTCOME, Russia would have become a third world country, plundered by the West. This is what the sanctions against Russia are all about. 

Today we are warned about the resurgence of China... It's fair to say that China may no be playing by the rules in regard to some issues. But what are the rules? 

The US has often undercut the local manufacturing or agriculture by subsidising its own and exporting massive amount of "surplus" at a loss. As well through various mechanism of "charitable" enterprises, it encourages, by giving "free" foods, the replacement of "local" diets with an American diet (Coke, etc). This one is very insidious. The way the IMF won't supply moneys to "socialist" countries but only to capitalist private enterprise has seen the decline of proper "local" food supply in Africa.

Read from top.

 

Read also:  interfering in everyone's business to control the world....

the CIA empirium...

 

...

... The US Office of Strategic Services (OSS) became [in 1947] the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Untrammeled by any laws anywhere, it is devoid of any governmental oversight so as to give American politicians ‘plausible deniability’. Such absolute power can only corrupt, making psychopaths of men like Allen Dulles whose brother John Foster Dulles was Secretary of State. Both men enjoyed power and their arrogance was colossal; trained as Wall Street lawyers, they held laws and lawmakers in contempt. Although Truman had set-up the CIA, in a newspaper article (exactly one month after the assassination of President Kennedy) he called for an end to CIA covert ops.

Because we are dealing with the most dishonest and secretive of agencies, what little we know can only ever be the tip of the iceberg. Yet the known record fills hundreds of books, and details the constant interference in every country on earth: blackmail, disinformation, torture and assassination are the tools of their trade, as is made explicit by the latest appointment of Gina Haspell as head of the CIA. No other country in history has ever operated at this level of depravity and yet they are never held to account for these crimes against Humanity.

It is at this point that I make a plea to our elected leaders. The historical record shows that an alliance with the devil is a dangerous arrangement: those who foolishly seek power and ride the back of the tiger end up inside. New Zealand is a small, friendly and decent country with no obvious enemies in sight; this reputation for good neighbourliness, justice and fair play, once lost, would be very hard to regain. If our erstwhile allies (US/UK) have been complicit in every international crime imaginable: torture, indefinite detentions, incarceration of refugees, illegal invasions, starving of populations, drone strikes, white phosphorous, depleted uranium, cluster bombs, napalm, agent orange, nuclear weapons etc. It is long overdue that we broke free from this ghastly association.

New Zealand has stood tall many times in the past and punched well above her weight in many ways. The non-violent resistance of Parihaka (before Gandhi was born); women’s suffrage, the 8-hour working day, the opposition to Apartheid, our revulsion of nuclear weapons. What would those giants of our past have to say about today’s toadying lack of moral courage, our slavish devotion to two degenerate empires, our choosing the wrong side – both of history and of our own survival? Never forget that if Blair had stood up to George W. Bush, there would have been no 2003 invasion of Iraq nor the resultant Hell throughout the Middle East and North Africa. Why should we spend billions on anti-submarine aircraft when we cannot pay the salaries of nurses, teachers, police, and all the other services which our taxes ought to cover? Why should American arms manufacturers profit by selling us weapons that do nothing whatsoever to protect us, but everything to destroy us – physically, morally, spiritually and financially?

 

Read more:

https://off-guardian.org/2018/07/28/new-zealand-the-ebb-flow-of-history/

 

Read from top...

 

Read also:

under the surface of news — more on the momentous 2, February 1959, leading eventually to brexit...