lundi 10 janvier 2011

US led terror management in Iran and elsewhere

An article written by Christophe R. Horsel, a German author, business consultant, and expert on security related issues in Central Asia and the Middle East, and published in the Tehran Times. The American translation edited here by Denunciator’s Eye.

Recently, terror attacks have failed in Sweden, been thwarted in Denmark, or were false alarms, like the American made test device in a Namibian airport
and last weekend’s small plane violating Capitol’s air space in Washington.
But the same weekend’s attack on Christians in Egypt, where the secret services are CIA dominated, left 21 dead and raised a huge outcry from Christian countries. However there is never an outcry whenever Iran is hit. In the last months Iran has seen bomb attacks against its nuclear scientists as well as its population. This comes to no surprise to those Western observers, familiar with our new way of imposing our will on those we don’t like.
Firstly, let’s take a quick glimpse at attacks on “important human targets”, such as nuclear scientists. It was the John Sawers, the current head of British foreign secret service MI6 who had asked for more operations against Iran’s civil and completely legal nuclear program in his one and only public statement. U.S. commitment in favor of such operations is publicly known since George W. Bush was allowed by congress some extra 400 million dollars in secret service funds for use against Iran. Europe faced this kind of terror against its scientists in the seventies and eighties, when around 13 German and French metallurgists died, one by one in a strange string of circumstances, accidents, etc. The practice continued until the well known German weekly Spiegel wrote a great deal about it.
Germany also had a special experience of its own with state-guided terror, by the “Red Army Faction” RAF, a pro-communist terror outlet. It killed one of Germany’s own leading scientists, Siemens manager Karl-Heinz Beckurts, in 1986. In 1998 a well known German banker Alfred Herrhausen was murdered. He had demanded total debt relief for poorer countries, a political move which would have undermined the financial grip that is part of U.S. worldwide dominance. In 1991 Detlev Karsten Rohwedder, a successful former labor union leader, was designated to head the German “Treuhand”, the institution founded to organize privatization of East German state-owned property after unification. After his murder many “mistakes” were made by his successor in the economic transformation of the former GDR. And Germany lost dozens of billions of Marks, a lot of know how, and access to markets in the course of it. German publications have therefore dubbed this latest decade of RAF activities as guided by foreign intelligence.
These actions may be best described by the term “terror management”, which the present author used during his selected leadership classes for the German ISAF force in Afghanistan between 2006 and 2007. The term describes state-backed operations for the set-up, training, supply and operational guidance of terror groups for international operations, with the object of gaining more power, control and influence. Nowadays, mostly Muslim radicals are used as patsies when justifying military deployments, occupations, oppression and all kinds of force worldwide. It did not start with the events of 9/11, and does not end there. Openly and with the consent of the German army leadership, the present author has described the first decade of the 21st century as the “decade of terror management”.
Many events in Afghanistan and Pakistan can be linked to this kind of policy, starting with the training of Hekmatyar, Haqqani and many others in Pakistan since 1974. Nowadays in Afghanistan most foreign soldiers die of so-called “IEDs”, which are roadside bombs. There is ample proof that NATO’s secret services know quite well, where, when, how, and with what type of materials these deadly weapons are being made. But they do little to stop production or the producers. When the present author informed an all-faction parliamentary control group, none of its members took any action.
Against Iran the Baluch group known as “Jundallah” is being set-up, trained, equipped and guided by the CIA. Among many others, U.S. Pulitzer price winner Seymour Hersh has written about this. “Jundallah” is a multi-purpose promoter of U.S. interests in the region. One aim, for example, was to stop China pursuing its plan of establishing a naval base in Pakistan’s western port town of Gwadar. After a few well-placed bomb attacks on Chinese engineers, attributed to Jundallah, China reduced its number from 300 to about a dozen – and even these cannot freely roam the town’s streets, but are confined to barracks behind a three-layered wall of security. Sino-Pakistani relations are obviously not high on the U.S. agenda.
In the run up to Iran’s last election, a heavy bomb attack stirred up public unrest and allowed CIA spying on internal reactions by Iran’s government. The strategy involved using ethnic and or religious differences to promote disunity. This hostile policy dates back to the time of American policy adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, who had originally proposed these methods for use against the now defunct Soviet Union.
The well known terror attacks in London in 2005, with 56 dead and more than 700 injured, as well as in Madrid in 2004, with 191 dead and around 2000 injured, are interesting examples of terror management. A few facts should be mentioned here. In London, employees of a security company called “Vigour Consultants” noticed during an emergency exercise that the exact script of their “exercise” was happening outside in the City of London exactly at the given scripted time. The explosions, which according to the official version were caused by bombs taken into the subway by the “terrorists”, were obviously caused by devices placed in the tunnels by experts.
The nature of the damage speaks for itself, as do the “official versions” themselves. The UK government and Scotland Yard kept media and public opinion busy with so many theories about what had happened that day, that people grew wary of them. Immediately after the events, it was speculated that the explosive materials had come from sources in the Balkans. Unfortunately, there were too many proven secret links with government-sponsored terrorism in that area. So this part of the story had to be changed, too. In Madrid five out of eleven “terrorists” were police informers. When the explosives were handed over to them, policemen were listening in on the operation. Important parts of this story were hushed up.
Why should a government hit its own citizens? It is an age old political trick. If democratic liberties become the target of powerful elitist circles, a population fearful of violent crime is much easier to manipulate into accepting restrictive legislation. In the U.S. both presidents, Bush and Obama, have used warnings about presumed “terror attacks” to try and influence the electorate prior to elections.

Research is nowadays advanced enough to permit a systematic approach by institutions in the setting up of manipulable terror cells. A criminal environment, such as in the artificial Mafia state of Kosovo, is extremely useful in this respect. Muslim radicals are flown in or recruited locally and given training, arms, and operational guidance. A lawyer told me that in the southern German town of Munich’s municipal administration, two state employees are involved in giving German passports to known criminals, whereas innocent and honest applicants for German citizenship have to wait more than twice the official term of eight years, and still face denial of citizenship.
In Germany, the so-called “Sauerland Group” of terrorists was so well spied on by police, that at one moment the bombers got out of their car and cut the tires of the surveillance car at a red traffic light! This little incident did not stop them from continuing their original plans. Their explosives were, according to the “official version”, secretly exchanged for less dangerous materials by the police. The whole story ended in a much-publicized police raid in the fall of 2007, before any more harm was done. But to get the real story we’ll have to wait for the frustrated state employee’s memoirs. One local senior police officer complained to the present author: “We do the bomb attacks ourselves.”
Another member, this time of the FBI-type German Federal Crime Office (BKA) had already done some whistle-blowing. He had inquired into the Bali disco bombing in 2002, when more than 200 people were killed. But just as he had gained access to the perpetrators’ inner circle he was called off the case and then suspended. He even lost his job and his pension rights after more than 25 years of highly successful, much-lauded and often dangerous police work. His book was published in 2008.
Why are cases of failed, thwarted or false-alarm “terror attacks” like the ones mentioned above so numerous in the western hemisphere? Obviously, authorities are afraid of risking lives, because too many questions might arise, and journalistic research is too powerful to keep the secret service involvement hidden. Also, the assassinations might inspire more ethically minded government employees to share their classified knowledge anonymously. Journalists critical of the NATO governments have already stated that any more of these “botched” terrorist attacks may one day fail to frighten the citizens into the desired civil obedience.
NATO citizens and their Iranian fellows may have more in common than is widely known. Both fall victims to NATO government-sponsored terrorism.

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire