Profiling Radicals Through Stress Analysis and Data-Mining

By Lou Michel

Imagine using the same technology to locate a lone bomber before he carries out his terrorist act and to identify a troubled veteran or first responder ground down by tragedies and violence.

Stop imagining.

Some 120 local first responders from law enforcement and other agencies, the military and mental health professionals gathered Friday to hear firsthand about an advanced computer program that can accomplish those two seemingly different tasks.

The presentation was part of the International First Responder-Military Symposium held at Hilbert College in the Town of Hamburg.

A Swiss professor working with a Massachusetts Institute of Technology scientist who heads the Mind Machine Project there outlined how this program operates through computerized scanning of phone calls and electronic messages sent through e-mail and social networking mechanisms.

“Suppose you know there’s a threat to the president when he is visiting, say, Texas. Through information obtained by the National Security Agency, we have the tools to go through huge quantities of data obtained from that area,” said professor Mathieu Guidere of the University of Geneva.

How? “The computer system detects resentment in conversations through measurements in decibels and other voice biometrics,” he said. “It detects obsessiveness with the individual going back to the same topic over and over, measuring crescendos.”

As for written transmissions scrutinized by the computer program, it can detect the same patterns of fixation on specified subjects, said Guidere, who has worked for years screening mass data that involves radicalization and ideological indoctrination.

Using character traits that have been identified through psychological profiles conducted on lone bombers following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Guidere said he and his colleagues developed programs that isolate signs pointing to a potential terrorist.

He said lone bombers, in particular, are not mentally deranged but harbor hatred and deep resentment toward government. Their emotional spikes, Guidere explained, can be identified by the computer program.

The practical side is that once the individual has been identified, the information can be passed along to authorities so surveillance can begin, he said.

Currently, the computer program can review 10,000 voice or other electronic transmissions in an hour. The goal, the professor said, is to increase the capacity to 100,000 per hour.

On the civilian side, the program can be used by psychologists and other mental health providers working with war veterans, law enforcement officials and others to measure their progress in recovery.

“By recording the voice of the patient, the program can rate negativity and positivity with depression and other emotional disorders,” said Guidere, who is working with Dr. Newton Howard, director of MIT’s Mind Machine Project.

Allies and values–Jarosław Kaczyński (trans. from Polish)

[Brother of the dead president warns of neo-imperialist foreign policy of Moscow.]

Allies and values

Jarosław Kaczyński – President of the Law and Justice

Poland is the sixth largest country in the European Union. Apart from Great Britain, Poland is the most persistent U.S. ally in Europe. It is constantly involved in political and military cooperation with Washington. The late Polish President Lech Kaczynski, as well as my Government Law and Justice party, has consistently built an alliance of large and smaller countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Its axis was the Baltic countries (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia) and the Visegrad countries (Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary). We did a lot to the European structures and NATO to bring the former Soviet republics such as Ukraine and Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia and Moldova. Pursuing national interests and regional zderzaliśmy the foreign policy of Russia, which systematically reconstructs its sphere of influence – a fact often overlooked by American and European politicians.

Our policy formed part of the traditions of the Polish “Solidarity”. It should be noted that already during the first congress of trade union “Solidarity” (1981) issued a special proclamation to the nations of Central and Eastern Europe, which upset the Kremlin and the Warsaw Pact. Many Poles – including members of my government – was inspired by the beliefs and national tradition in the spirit “for our freedom and yours”, believing that the freedom of our country is closely linked to guarantees of freedom and democracy in many parts of Europe.

At the same time, together with other nations, fought for odkłamanie history of Central and Eastern Europe, falsified by the many decades of Soviet propaganda. Today we are witnessing attempts to diminish the role of our region in Europe. Such actions are a gift for those who do not recognize the values of democracy and human rights. May seem attractive business partners, but do not respect the values and standards that prevail in the Euro-Atlantic political space.

Today the situation is quite different during the EU enlargement in 2004, however, our priority expansion of Europe’s role in Central and Eastern Europe remains unchanged and we believe that it is acting in the interests of the transatlantic alliance. Countries that have recently regained their freedom and a break from Moscow – also thanks to the phenomenon of Polish “Solidarity” – expect a serious partner and relationship with Washington.

Relations between Central and Eastern Europe and the U.S. must be two-way street. The countries of our region are also worried about Tehran’s policy or situation in the Middle East, however, our region must be afforded the protection and safety. I am writing this shortly after joint military exercises of Russia and Belarus under the codename “Zapad” where the “enemy” was my country.

We are a stable member of the international structures, like NATO and the European Union. We play well in other international teams. But to ensure our national interest, we can not rule forever, the right to veto the decisions of these structures, which are contrary to our aspirations and priorities. Moreover, the European Union, two of the three countries using the instrument to veto most often is “prymusi” European integration, countries are very involved in the deepening of Germany and Belgium. This means that you can simultaneously love united Europe and creatively to oppose some of its aspects.

There were no items to install anti-missile shield project in Poland and the Czech Republic. But there are growing indications that the declining American engagement in Europe. It’s bad for both sides. Unfortunately, this situation takes place, while the neo-imperialist foreign policy of Moscow, it is common kontrreakcji from major political playmakers in Europe and America. Strengthening bilateral cooperation with major European countries, Russia, dictated by economic reasons, carries a significant political consequences, and reduces the importance of the European Union.

Europe in 2010 is dominated by the big EU Member States in a much greater extent than it did in 2004. The Lisbon Treaty does not help achieve the promise of a substantial increase Europe’s role in international politics. This instrument does not załagodził the impact of the global financial crisis.

In life you need friends, and in politics – alliances. Friendship is not built through selfishness, and not cemented alliances by forgetting the allies. In this latter respect, the example of Georgia is typical: a policy of concessions to Russia on the part of the existing European and non-allies, does not encourage other states to be with the Euro-Atlantic system for good or for bad. Polish journalist Julius Mieroszewski, who after 1945 had not returned to the Polish-occupied by Soviet troops, thus protesting against the imposition of Russian and Communist domination in our region of Europe, he wrote in exile, that the policy to be effective it must first be morally justified.

This old truth I would like to dedicate today’s main actors in the international political scene. Please respect the interests of not only the largest but also medium and small countries. Please return to the standards and morals, which were for many people and nations based on faith in a better world. Signposting should be vacuumed values in international politics.

Under those rules, behaved in public life, my brother, President Lech Kaczynski, and for them died in a terrible crash Smolensk.

President of the Law and Justice
Jaroslaw Kaczynski

An article in the English version was sent out to politicians and opinion leaders in the world

ATTEMPTED COUP IN ECUADOR? Police Mutiny Spurs State of Emergency

[Police pay cuts set-off a possible coup.  This should be kept in mind by leaders of other governments as they attempt to implement IMF mandated pay cuts and tax increases.  The world is a powder keg.  People will not accept further hardships to finance budget balancing, or to pay for unneeded military increases.  The time for change has come, gentlemen.  It is the people's turn to set the agenda.]

ATTEMPTED COUP IN ECUADOR? Police Mutiny Spurs State of Emergency

Ecuador’s President Rafael Correa was injured when rowdy protests by policemen turned into a full-blown crisis and the government declared a state of emergency in the face of what the head of state called an attempted coup. “Gentlemen, if you want to kill the president, here he is. Kill me if you want to, kill me if you have courage, instead of being in a crowd, hiding like cowards,” an indignant Correa told the police

QUITO – Rowdy protests by Ecuadorian police unhappy with changes to their pay and benefits turned into a full-blown crisis Thursday as cops besieged President Rafael Correa in a Quito hospital and the government declared a state of emergency in the face of what the head of state called an attempted coup.

Correa, who recently underwent knee surgery, entered the hospital after being injured when mutinous police accosted him and his bodyguards as they tried to leave the main police barracks in the capital after he addressed the disgruntled cops.

“Gentlemen, if you want to kill the president, here he is. Kill me if you want to, kill me if you have courage, instead of being in a crowd, hiding like cowards,” an indignant Correa told the police.

The president then entered the Metropolitan Military Hospital, next to the police barracks, to be treated for an injury to his leg.

He later told state radio by telephone that the mutinous police had surrounded the building and were effectively holding him hostage.

“It is an attempt at a coup d’etat by the opposition and by certain entrenched groups in the armed forces and police that were also there, basically the Sociedad Patriotica group,” Correa said, referring to the political party founded by former President Lucio Gutierrez.

Speaking by telephone from Brazil, Gutierrez, who took office in January 2003 and was ousted by Ecuador’s Congress in April 2005, denied any role in Thursday’s uprising.

Rebellious police also occupied the National Assembly and disturbances spread across Ecuador, prompting presidential aid Alexis Mera to declare a state of emergency giving the armed forces responsibility for both external and internal security.

The head of the armed forces Joint Command, Gen. Ernesto Gonzalez, went on television Thursday afternoon to call for an end to the mutiny.

“We invite the national police and sectors of civil society, as well as certain elements of the armed forces, to abandon their (aggressive) attitude,” he said.

At the same time, he urged that the legislation which sparked the police uprising “be reviewed or nullified.”

The military, Gonzalez said, is “subordinated to the national interest and also subordinated to the legal, legitimately constituted and maximum authority of the armed forces – the president of the republic.”

Hundreds of Correa partisans gathered in front of the presidential palace, where Foreign Minister Ricardo Patiño appeared on a balcony to urge people to rescue Correa from the military hospital.

But when thousands of government supporters approached the hospital in an attempt to break the siege, police repeatedly drove them away with massive volleys of tear gas.

An Efe reporter also witnessed the cops firing rubber bullets at the crowd.

At least one person has died in the violence, Security Minister Miguel Carvajal said, while extending an offer of dialogue with the rebellious police if they stand down.

Inside the hospital, meanwhile, Correa was meeting with representatives of the disgruntled police, the official Andes news agency said.

The police were accompanied by an attorney and Finance Minister Patricio Rivera was also present, the agency said.

Leaders of individual Latin American countries issued statements deploring the uprising and expressing unconditional support for Correa, who first took office in early 2007 and was re-elected in a landslide in 2009 after securing ratification of a new constitution.

The 12-member Union of South American Nations, or UNASUR, convened an emergency summit for Friday in Argentina, whose government current occupies the bloc’s rotating presidency.

The presidents of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez; Bolivia, Evo Morales; Colombia, Juan Manuel Santos; Peru, Alan Garcia; and Uruguay, Jose Mujica, confirmed that they would travel to Buenos Aires for the gathering.

At an emergency session in Washington, representatives of the Organization of American States unanimously approved a resolution repudiating any attempt to subvert the democratic order in Ecuador.

Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero telephoned Correa to convey Spain’s support for Ecuador’s democratic institutions and condemn the police mutiny, officials in Madrid told EFE.


[The roots of this technology--SSRM Tek.]


Original url
Published: December 22, 1998 German ZDF TV

NARRATOR: The Kremlin. Until shortly the symbol of absolute power. The dream of the red czars was a disciplined society they could completely control. This dream once inspired George Orwell to write his darkly futuristic novel, “1984”. Autumn 1998, and [now] there is a new crisis in Russia. Years after the collapse of communism the citizens are crushed as much by the economic collapse as they are crushed by the aftermaths of the more than seven decades lasting old system. It was like a net of blunt force and secret control which constrained the citizens. Some of these methods, like the Stalinistic camps, were reported all over the world. Others even its victims only report very rarely. In this country, many see themselves as victims: Victims of armed conflicts or political repression. Victims of secret psychiatric experiments or the constant fear of the “big brother”.

[A young man is shown. He is in a wheelchair and has bandages all over his head. An old lady, presumably an assistant to Dr. Smirnov, attaches electrodes to various parts on his head and body.]

NARRATOR: This young man is a victim of the war in Tschetschenia. A soldier who could escape from the surrounded Grosnie.

MAN IN WHEELCHAIR: “Mama has cried. She thanks you for everything you have done for us.”

NARRATOR: Only a year ago, due to his war trauma, Sasha could neither talk nor move on his own. He had eye and hearing disturbances. Traditional psychiatry had given him up as a hopeless case and condemned him to vegetate in a closed asylum.

OLD WOMAN [asks Man In Wheelchair]: “Is it conformable for you like this ? You can sit calmly this way and rest your head.” [The man in the wheelchair is seated in front of a computer screen].

NARRATOR: Soon yet another session of a treatment will start which eventually will completely heal the young man. The instrument of this treatment is a computer program which has been individually tailored to each patient. Over a system of impulses it directly acts on his subconscious. Its inventor refers to this treatment as “Psycho-Correction”.  [read HERE]

The Russian Invasion Of The United States

The Russian Invasion Of The United States

Sep 30, 2010


“Humanity stands on the brink of a psychotronic war.”~Russian Military Article

As the United States prepares for the coming war, and it is coming, we must advocate the protection of our children.  Our children are our most important resource; they represent the future of the United States, our independent heritage, and self-evident freedom of thought.  Without our children’s ability to think freely, creatively, emotionally—we as a nation, will cease to exist.  And, our enemies are quite aware of this fact.

The United States is a country without walls.  Traditionally, we are immigrants, arriving on the continent’s shores from Lithuania to China.  We have come to this country to provide better lives, free of totalitarianism, communism, and oppression, for the best interest of the next generation.  It is in the United States that Native American, Jew, Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Palestinian, Sikh, Mexican, Israeli, Bangladeshi, Vietnamese, Ethiopian, and so many others can live side by side, eating together in the same restaurants, and send their children to the same schools.  I know these immigrants.  My neighbors, my friends.  Those still overseas, who live under hardship still say, “Keep America safe for us.”  The United States is viewed as the last outpost, and our country is vast, but we are allowing ourselves to become polarized.  And, our enemies are quite aware of this fact.  They gloat at our failures.

During 9/11 we were taken by surprise.  We should have been prepared.  Now, rumors of war fill the air again.  Americans do not want war though.  We are tired of fighting, losing our soldiers, killing others.  In war, the innocents always die too.

With our economic situation overwhelming us, the government’s attention is attuned to matters at home, while battling current wars abroad.  Yes, they’re alert to further terror attacks.  But what if the next attack wasn’t on the ground, nor even visible?

The possible ultimate defeat of the United States will come with the control of the human mind.  I believe it may begin with our children.   The mental control or deaths of our children would strike fear in the heart of every man and woman in the country.  For adults, there is nothing we would not do for the next generation.  We are at war folks, with the Russians.  They have never ceased being our enemy.  My nightmare is a Russian invasion of The United States without us even knowing.

The Brutality of the Russians

Reminiscent of the Varangians who pillaged and burnt their way across Northern Europe with a sword, the Rus carry this same type of brutality into the 21st century.

In 2002, Chechen militants took the Moscow Theatre hostage, holding 850 hostages.  To subdue the hostages, the Russian military pumped the theatre with a toxic chemical agent (fentanyl or 3-methylfentanyl), killing 129 hostages and the 39 militants. Though the deaths of five children were reported by medical personnel to journalists, the official statement read that no children were among the dead. (1)

In 2004, Chechen terrorists took the Beslan school hostage in Russia, holding 1,100 people.  The outcome resulted in the deaths of 186 children (of 777) as Russians went in on the third day of the standoff using tanks, flamethrower rockets, and heavy weaponry. (2)

The Russian wars with Chechnya, [First 1994-1996 (3); Second 1999-2009] have had lasting effects upon the civilian population, specifically an entire generation of Chechen children:

“As of 2008, the infant mortality rate stood at 17 per 1,000, the highest in Russia; there are reports of growing a number of genetic disorders in babies and unexplained illnesses among school children. One child in 10 is born with some kind of anomaly that requires treatment. Some children whose parents can afford it are sent to the neighboring republic of Dagestan, where treatment is better; Chechnya lacks sufficient medical equipment in most of its medical facilities. According to the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), since 1994 to 2008 about 25,000 children in Chechnya have lost one or both parents. A whole generation of Chechen children is showing symptoms of psychological trauma. In 2006, Chechnya’s pro-Moscow deputy health minister, said the Chechen children had become “living specimens” of what it means to grow up with the constant threat of violence and chronic poverty. In 2007, the Chechen interior ministry has identified 1,000 street children involved in vagrancy; the number was increasing.” (4)

Eric Margolis, Contributing  Foreign Editor to the Toronto Sun writes, “Almost unknown is the genocide of two million of the USSR’s Muslim peoples: Chechens, Ingush, Crimean Tatars, Tajiks, Bashkirs and Kazaks. The Chechen independence fighters who today are branded as ‘terrorists’ by the U.S. and Russia are the grandchildren of survivors of Soviet concentration camps.  Add to this list of forgotten atrocities the murder in Eastern Europe from 1945-47 of at least two million ethnic Germans, mostly women and children, and the violent expulsion of 15 million more Germans, during which two million German girls and women were raped. …During the bitter winter of 1932-33, 25,000 Ukrainians per day were being shot or died of starvation and cold. Cannibalism became common. Ukraine, writes historian Robert Conquest, looked like a giant version of the future Bergen-Belsen death camp. The mass murder of seven million Ukrainians, three million of them children, and deportation to the gulag of two million more (where most died) was hidden by Soviet propaganda….Russia never prosecuted any of its mass murderers, as Germany did.” (5)

War with Russia means “no mercy,” not even for the children.

History books have been written showing that force was used to control civilian and enemy populations.  A good example of this would be the invasion of Celtic Britain by Germanic tribes and the Normans (‘North Men’–descendants of the Vikings). (6)

Using physical means, the native populace was either driven to the other isles of Wales, Ireland, and Scotland or were killed.  In an effort to maintain control and power, man physically destroyed man.  Not much changed during the next 1,000 years until after atom bombs decimated Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  Afterward, a push was made to both continue nuclear research as a defense and to simultaneously search out further means of subvertly controlling large populations.

As the world has simultaneously expanded and shrunk because of the continuous exchange of information, trade, and technology, the mind wars have grown.  The arrival of the 21st century has heralded the fight for the power of the collective mind.  Like the United States, a country without walls, the human body is an open organism.

During the height of the Cold War, the Russians completed their own neuroscience research (7) as well, studying Extrasensory Perception (ESP), Psychokinesis, Out of the Body Experiences, Hypnosis at a Distance,(8) Remote Viewing, and the development of weapons useful for altering the perception of human reality.(9)

During the Cold War, the Soviet Union (Russia today) also used microwaves, directing them at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow.  “In 1988, ‘thirty-five years after security officers first noticed that the Soviets were bombarding the US embassy in Moscow with microwave radiation, the US government still has not determined conclusively—or is unwilling to reveal—the purpose behind the beams.’ The US government did know what was happening.  The Soviets had developed methods for disrupting the purposeful thought of humans and were using their knowledge to impact diplomats in the United States embassy in Moscow…..The CIA did investigate the use and effect of microwaves on human beings in response to a Soviet practice of beaming microwaves on the US embassy.” (10)

“It is completely clear that the state which is first to create such weapons will achieve incomparable superiority.” — Major I. Chernishev, Russian army (11)

The Russians have been developing psychotronic weapons: those which transfer energy via magnetic or electromagnetic fields (EMF) to a receiver.  That person(s) would become mentally influenced.  This information is received subconsciously, leaving the receiver completely unaware.  EMF induction affects a person’s body, mood, and thoughts.  Developed for use against a military enemy, in the wrong hands, perhaps the Russians, these kinds of weaponry could be targeted at the U.S. civilian population.

Dr. Dean Radin,  Senior Scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) was asked his opinion of EMF mind control outcomes on the brain:

“The question is, were there ever elements of the intel/military world engaged in experiments on human behavior (not mind) control? Yes, many decades ago, during the cold war. But is such work still taking place? I don’t know, because if it is it would be a black project and then by definition only those involved would know of it. I hope no such projects are underway, because I do believe that EMF, used in nefarious ways, can destabilize the brain, and potentially generate feelings of violence or apathy. But I very strongly doubt that specific thoughts or intentions or actions can be induced.” (12)

Could it be that the Russians would influence our children and our youth to commit murder against their own families?  An attack from within?  We as parents would be hesitant to fight back against our own blood who would be behaving as zombies.  And are we possibly already seeing the beginning of this subliminal influence in our population with increased attacks upon innocents by a lone gunman, presumed crazy?

Or will our children and their minds be held hostage while we receive new dictatorial orders from Moscow and the KGB?

Victor Solntsev of the Baumann Technical Institute in Moscow has stated that all levels of a person’s or group’s psyche (subconscious, conscious, and superconscious) are targets. (13)

Biblical prophecy states, “And the people shall be oppressed, everyone by another, and every one by his neighbor: the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honorable.”~ Isaiah 3:5

Most interesting, the Native American HOPI Prophecy is quite similar: “Time prior to Purification Day– Weather changes, Earth changes, mass starvation, 3rd world war, and children committing murder.”~ Hopi Elders (14)

The Russians thrive on polarization.  The time for an invasion of their enemy is ripe.  If the Russians wish to begin such a war, they might first need to take down HAARP.  HAARP is the High-Frequency Active Aural Research Program, based in Gokoma, Alaska, and is jointly managed by the US Air Force and the US Navy, and is considered a part of a new generation of sophisticated weaponry under the US Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).  Essentially, it is the American counterpart to the Russian’s program.  When the war begins, it will begin in Alaska.

“Suffer the Children”

Afternote: I am a dreamer.  I have had several dreams of WWIII, two which indicated the Russians will attack us first.

Liz Colado, essayist and poet, resides in the United States.  A poet since childhood, her poems reflect the images and premonitions of her subconscious dreams.  The writing of poetry has been her escape to a world apart, a dimension of other, a reality considered.  The meaning of poetry has helped center her all of her life.  She is also the main character of a life exposed, written by an anonymous author.  Read the poetry of Liz Colado and consider the interior of her mind to be the discovery of a personal dream journal on the edge. The author publishes exclusively at Basil & Spice. Visit Liz Colado’s Writer’s Page.











11) Chernishev, “Can Rulers Make `Zombies’ and Control the World?” Orienteer, February 1997, pp. 58-62.

12) p.32


14) Art Bell: Transcript of Jun. 17th 1998 interview with Robert Ghost Wolf and Hopi Elders.


Copyright © 2006-2010, Basil & Spice. All rights reserved.

“Partnership for Peace” Program Prepares the Penetration of Tajikistan

[So-called "counter-insurgency" aid and "counter-narcotics' missions are excuses for NATO to begin the flow of equipment into Tajikistan's eastern regions, right beside western China.  The "Partnership for Peace" program is a marketing ploy, intended to convince Tajikistan's military leaders that they need more military hardware.  Tajik leaders must realize that the more "aid" they receive, the greater the American trouble-making.  It is not necessary that they roll over to accomadate other people's plans.  The world community stands ready to help-out in the region, if called upon.  Curing what ails them requires the expulsion of unwanted foreign elements, wherever they come from.  The countries of Central Asia must join together for safety, not bring in the big powers to defend them from problems created by the big powers in the first place.]

Rakhmonov and Simmons discussed the establishment of the Regional Centre for Counter-Terrorism

Avesta.Tj | 31.08.2010 | President Rahmon met in Dushanbe on Tuesday with NATO Secretary General’s special envoy for Central Asia and Caucasus Robert Simmons.
At a news conference held after talks with the head of the Tajik state, Simmons said at a meeting with the leader of Tatarstan discussed problems of regional and military cooperation.
“We also discussed the strengthening of cooperation between Tajikistan and NATO in the framework of the Partnership for Peace” - “Simmons said.
According to him, in a conversation with Rakhmon discussed issues of establishing a regional center for combating terrorism. Simmons did not say where it will be set up this center.
“I thanked the President of the Republic of Tajikistan for the promotion of transit cargo to Afghanistan, and for its assistance to Tajikistan in addressing the Afghan problem” – “Simmons said.
Affecting the Afghan problems, special envoy of the secretary general of NATO said: “The NATO forces will not leave Afghanistan until such time until they reach their goals, that is, security and stability in this country.”
According to him, “NATO plays a constructive role in Afghanistan, rather than destructive, as portrayed NATO stay in the IRA, the individual states.
“We will establish cooperation with law enforcement authorities in Afghanistan and assist in solving social problems”, – said Simmons.

Shrinks From Soros’ Open Society Penetrating Local Culture

[Wearing a humanitarian disguise, the democratic-revolutionary termites eat away at Tajik society, undermining traditions, injecting a disruptive poison into the minds of their victims.  The various strains of destabilization which have flowed from Ronald Reagan's NED (National Endowment for Democracy) serve as a private CIA everywhere that a door is opened to them. This story on aid to domestic violence victims, as well as the report on American bomb disposal experts penetrating the Tajik border guards, should be seen as the same current, the stream of American destabilization waiting to do to Tajikistan what has been done to Kyrgyzstan.  Renewed civil war in Tajikistan, just like the impending destruction of Pakistan, is the mission of the trouble-makers.]

Use of psychosocial approach in work with violence victims discussed in Dushanbe

Author: Mavjouda Hasanova

DUSHANBE, October 1, 2010, Asia-Plus — Issues related to use of psychosocial approach in work with victims of violence is a major topic of a five-day seminar that has opened in Dushanbe today.

Organized within the framework of the Gender Program of the Tajik Branch of the Open Society/Assistance Foundation (OSI/AF-Tajikistan), the meeting is the last of series of seminars on this subject conducted in 2009-2010.

The training that will last till October 5 has brought together 15 psychologists from crisis and resource centers from all regions of the country, as well as lecturers at Tajik National University and Khujand State University to consider problems of domestic violence against children, violence against children in schools, methods of work with victims of violence, etc.

According to the OSI/AF-Tajikistan, the main objective of these training seminars is in promoting formation of skills of work with victims of violence through psychological consultations.  The seminars are dedicated to train and set up national teams of psychologist trainers on work with violence victims.

18 crisis and recourse centers and three branches of them now operate in Tajikistan to provide support to victims of violence.  The centers make available psychological, social and legal support and additional services (computer courses, housekeeping courses and so forth) to victims of violence.

Psychosocial support is an approach to victims of disaster, catastrophe or violence to foster resilience of communities and individuals. It aims at easing resumption of normal life, facilitate affected people participation to their convalescence and preventing pathological consequences of potentially traumatic situations.

The psychosocial approach in work with victims of violence involves understanding a person’s internal psychological processes as a result of violence as well as how these processes interact with one’s current social and physical conditions.

KGB-Style Tactics Used In Ukraine In Support of Russia

SBU under fire for using KGB-style tactics

SBU under fire for using KGB-style tactics Security Service of Ukraine head Valeriy Khoroshkovsky

Olesia Oleshko

Public and politicians alike say they feel like they are living in a Soviet police state again.

One of the most reputable Ukrainian weeklies recently ran a joke: “In 2003 [then-Ukrainian President] Leonid Kuchma published his book named ‘Ukraine is not Russia.’ In 2010, he is going to publish another one: ‘I Was Mistaken [about that]’.’’

After President Viktor Yanukovych and his team came to power on Feb. 25, the country radically changed its course eastward. The president started copying the governing style of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. A crackdown on political opposition began under the cloak of an anti-corruption campaign. In Russia, media were tamed and politically disobedient oligarchs brought to heel.

All of it is reminiscent of the Soviet Union, the political entity that Putin and so many others admired, where the fearsome KGB was one of the main enforcers of the authoritarian system.

“You can’t help but notice that the atmosphere in Ukraine is getting rotten. It resembles Soviet times.”

- Stepan Kurpil, lawmaker.

Now, in Russia, the successor agency to the KGB is the Federal Security Service, known as the FSB. And it, too, under Putin’s patronage has Soviet-like powers.

In Ukraine, the equivalent law enforcement agency is the Security Service of Ukraine, or SBU.

During Viktor Yushchenko’s five-year presidency ending on Feb. 24, the SBU behaved a lot less like an oppressive law enforcement agency. Under the leadership of Valentyn Nalyvaychenko, a Yushchenko appointee, the agency became more open to the public and declassified a lot of previously secret historical documents.

Is all that changing now for the worse?

Some think so.

“You can’t help but notice that the atmosphere in Ukraine is getting rotten. It resembles Soviet times,” said lawmaker Stepan Kurpil, a parliamentarian with the opposition Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko. “I feel like we are living again in the Soviet Union.”

International groups

With one of Ukraine’s top oligarchs, Valeriy Khoroshkovsky, in charge of the SBU, the agency is reverting to heavy-handed practices, drawing public outrage. Khoroshkovsky, seen as the Yanukovych administration’s top enforcer, would not be interviewed for this story.

But one of Khoroshkovsky’s close associates, presidential chief of staff Sergiy Lyovochkin, blamed the criticism of Khoroshkovky and the SBU on political critics waging an unfounded campaign of discreditation.

Nevertheless, SBU actions speak for themselves.

Several days ago Viktoria Siumar, executive director of Mass Information Institute, a media think tank, said that SBU employees asked her concierge about her routine under the pretext of investigating a shady company registered at her address.
“It’s complete nonsense,” Siumar said. “We’ve been living here since the condo was built and there was no company here.”

“I know there are a lot of NGOs in many European countries that are funded by the U.S. Department of State so they basically promote interests of their donors in their home countries.”

- Inna Bohoslovska, Party of Regions’ lawmaker.

Siumar was also surprised by Party of Regions’ lawmaker Inna Bohoslovska’s reaction to her case at a TV political talk show. The lawmaker asked her about the sources of funding and, according to Siumar didn’t see any problem in checking grantees of international organizations.

Bohoslovska in a short interview with KP said that Ukrainian NGOs should their sources of funding. “He who pays the piper calls the tune,” Bohoslovska said.

“I know there are a lot of NGOs in many European countries that are funded by the U.S. Department of State so they basically promote interests of their donors in their home countries.”

Bohoslovska mentioned about the French-based media watchdog Reporters without Frontiers, that, according to her calls itself a European organization but it’s funded by American government.

“Thus the donor can directly influence the activities of its grantee,” Bohoslovska explained. “I would say: he who pays the money shapes the policy.”

Maryna Ostapenko, SBU spokesperson denied that the agency was digging information on Siumar. “She should have filed an official request to SBU, we would investigate it,” Ostapenko said. “But she never did.”

Earlier Mykola Kniazhytsky, director of TVi channel, complained he had been shadowed by SBU operatives.

SBU agents have also been in conflict with international organizations and foundations accredited in Ukraine. Three months ago, Nico Lange – director of the democracy-promoting Konrad Adenauer Foundation in Ukraine — was denied entry into the nation for several hours. There has not been a public explanation.

Shortly after, the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs warned international organizations to stay out of direct involvement in politics.

On Sept. 6, however, the International Renaissance Foundation (IRF) posted a statement saying that the SBU contacted its grantee organizations and asked them to provide information about foundation-funded projects, including the financial information and evaluation of their impact on the upcoming local Oct. 31 elections.

Yevhen Bystrytsky, IRF executive director, said the foundation does not endorse any political forces in Ukraine. Instead, Bystrytsky said, the foundation is focused on charity projects for people with physical disabilities, low-income families, orphans and pensioners. “Nothing like this has happened before,” Bystrytksy said.

Bystrytsky believes the SBU encounters with the International Renaissance Foundation and Lange are linked.

“Those are very unwise actions done by officials, including those from SBU,” Bystrytksy said.

Siumar said that the SBU is mistaken if it thinks it can intimidate civil society and political opponents. “It really looks like they didn’t properly analyze what caused the Orange Revolution,” said Siumar, referring to the popular uprising that overturned a rigged presidential election in 2004, leading to Viktor Yanukovych’s triumph over Viktor Yanukovych for president on Dec. 26, 2004. “The Orange Revolution was not fueled by international foundations and grants. It was fueled by intimidation, pressure, censorship, corruption and the absence of independent justice.”

Ostapenko yet denies SBU playing political games and says that the agency is authorized to check Ukrainian NGO’s who get international funding if it has suspicions that this money will be used for political activities in Ukraine.

“SBU doesn’t exceed its powers,” Ostapenko said. “So far nobody could give us any facts proving this accusation.”

Historians, academia

“They asked me if I had any documents marked with secret/top secret, which is completely ridiculous, as the documents I was working with were all declassified”.

– Ruslan Zabily, an historian and director of Lviv Lontsky Prison Memorial.

On Sept. 8, six SBU agents detained Ruslan Zabily, an historian and director of Lviv Lontsky Prison Memorial, and interrogated him for more than 14 hours without letting him call a lawyer.

The SBU officers confiscated his laptop and external hard drives, where he kept electronic copies of declassified documents and his research files. They tried to persuade him to stop his research and think about teaching at school instead, as it “would be better for his family.”

Zabily says the agents were acting on verbal orders from Khoroshkovsky and were looking for documents that could have been used for Zabily’s research on strategy and tactics of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, known by the UPA acronym, the guerrilla fighters who battled Soviets to achieve Ukrainian national independence during World War II.

“They asked me if I had any documents marked with secret/top secret, which is completely ridiculous, as the documents I was working with were all declassified,” Zabily said. But now, Zabily and others believe, documents shedding light on Soviet atrocities in Ukraine will become classified as secret again – part of a new Kremlin-friendly historical revisionism.

“Revealing the truth about the Holodomor (the 1932-1933 Josef Stalin-ordered famine that killed millions of Ukraines) and UPA impedes spreading Russia’s influence on Ukraine,” Zabily explained. “Russia wants to implant its own national myths here in Ukraine, so the Ukrainian ones have got to go.”

On Sept. 9, Zabily learned that a criminal case has been launched against him. The researcher is also accused of publishing a state secret.

SBU spokesperson Maryna Ostapenko confirmed that Zabily was suspected of disseminating state secrets and collecting information in an unlawful manner. SBU officials are also trying to trace Zabily’s contacts with Ukrainian and foreign historians whose research focused on the history of Ukraine under the Communist regime.

The SBU appears to be trying to infiltrate the academic community once again, like its Soviet KGB predecessor. In May, agents tried to recruit Borys Hudziak, rector of the Ukrainian Catholic University in Lviv. Gudziak refused to cooperate.

Zabily also thinks that SBU’s visits to Hudziak and organizations funded by the International Renaissance Foundation are linked. “Those can’t be just coincidences,” Zabily said.

Kyiv Post staff writer Olesia Oleshko can be reached at

U.S. Diplomat Wants Afghanistan Dismantled

U.S. Diplomat Wants Afghanistan Dismantled


Afghanistan — Pakistan

Afghanistan: The destroyer of communism, defender of Western interests against the Soviets, a crossfire victim of the cold war; did serve for over a century as a buffer zone between British colonial India and Russian czarist regimes. It was the superpowers contentious great games that empowered the Jihadist; and that empowerment still perpetuates them today. However, Afghanistan may once again find itself falling victim or prey to an outsider, but this time only to an outsider’s misguided ideas. The idea of having Afghanistan sacrificed as a bifurcated state has been proposed blindly by a politically twisted neoconservative politician, by the name of Robert Blackwill; whofails to understand the inner feelings and desires of the Afghan masses. All Afghans who live inside the region are now forced to contemplate the exact symptoms of the intertwined cultural phenomenon that is Afghanistan, whereby now as the result of foreign occupier’s wrong policies, a tombstone is being engraved for another empire awaiting burial in its renowned graveyard.

Clearly Mr. Blackwill fails to envision an Afghanistan on life support and in critical condition, desperately in need of elongated recovery from its post trauma years of Soviet occupation, civil war, atrocious Islamic radical reign, and freshly, a victim of the failed Washington policies and ungifted leadership in Kabul. And yet, the assumed savvy diplomat publically calls for a half body amputation of this patient [Afghanistan] by salvaging its fabricated good parts from the bad. However, Mr. Blackwill’s mythical hypothesis is designed to segregate the country into Pashtun (South and East) and non-Pashtun (North and West) areas for a quick fix; attached with a minimum U.S.-NATO troop requirement to defend the North from the South. But this impracticality is guaranteed to engulf the region in an infinite war and the establishment of many more hostile, unmanageable, smaller and isolated states.

Evidently, this will lead to the creation of Pashtunistan, which is now only a “border” region –with its 55 million inhabitants heartland—a nation that is not suppose to ever exist – but after all, the Durand Line was a British invention to split the Pashtuns; however every Pashtun has interwoven webs of Pashtun “cousins”, and everyone is still “family” despite artificial borders. That said, a domino effect is sure to follow any Afghanistan disintegration, resulting in the disintegration of Pakistan as well; and eventually a remapping of the entire region only to save Northern Afghanistan of the Hazaras, Uzbeks, Turkmens and Tajiks from the stubborn Pashtuns in the South and East. Furthermore, such a policy would seriously undermine Afghanistan by fuelling inter-ethnic war.

Needless to say, there are millions of Pashtuns living in the North and West and non-Pashtuns in the South and East. Even if this partition were to take place, the North will be reluctant to share power amongst themselves and, hence, an escalation of further ethnic strife and civil wars would result. Furthermore, there are millions of Pashtuns that have no affiliation with the radicals, and abandoning those people would be a replication of the post Russian withdrawal abandonment that the U.S. has already experienced once before. In addition, the creation of new Pashtunistan would become the home for the world’s most notorious Jihadist.

In hindsight, delinking this ancient land from its century old shared history, culture and norms just because Washington failed in its obligation from the outset would be untenable; therefore, never should anything be sufficed for this uncalled-for decision. Moreover, this bifurcating doctrine was studied previously by the Russians, Iranians, and Tajikistan but never propped up as a realistic idea; and rest assured that it never will because a unified Afghanistan is the glue that keeps the region from descending into total hell.

On the other hand, Mr. Blackwill’s timely “out-of-the-square” thinking to split Afghanistan falls more than 2 months before U.S. President Obama’s Afghanistan strategy review. But undeniably, the President will not join the fool’s paradise when there is not even one Afghan to support this notion.

Blackwill also says, “How many people really believe that Kandahar is central to Western civilization? We did not go to Afghanistan to control Kandahar.” In fact, this notion is best described in an Afghani cliché, “A fox numerously failed to reach some hanging grapes from a high vine to eat, he finally gives up and says, they were too sour anyway.” Mr. Blackwill also quits in reference to Kandahar because it is a lost cause, knowing the fact that Kandahar is the key to winning Afghanistan but has no solution on the table. To his response I would also add, “British may experience a short memory of Kandahar, but not the Russians.”

If Blackwill’s plan to allow Washington to focus on a broader picture for its vital national interests–the rise of Chinese power, the Iranian nuclear program, nuclear terrorism and the future of Iraq–and keep a minimum force in the North in the expense of bifurcation of Afghanistan, then it is a delusional notion on his part because every Pashtun is guaranteed to fight to the end to disrupt, dismantle and defeat this policy on their soil.

There is no doubt that this policy would poison the well for generations to come by dividing people on the basis of ethnicity, religion and tribe, as the British did when their empire began to disintegrate.

The Taliban are winning, we are losing,” he said. “They have high moral and want to continue the insurgency. Plan A is going to fail. We need a Plan B.”

Bear in mind Mr. Blackwill, Afghanistan is inseparable, and at the end of the day, the only Plan B is an Afghan solution.

Khalil Nouri is the cofounder of New World Strategies Coalition Inc., a native think tank for nonmilitary solution studies for Afghanistan.

Why Indo-US media now target Gen Kayani

Why Indo-US media now target Gen Kayani

Salim Bokhari

LAHORE—After having failed to malign Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) as an institution and its chief Gen Ahmad Shuja Pasha, the biased Indo-US media has now turned their guns at Chief of the Army Staff General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani.

American newspapers and Indian print and electronic media is on the rampage, using unauthentic references from sponsored books and hearsay, bidding to cast aspersions on the professionalism of the Pakistani Army Chief. His sin, according to a series of statements issued by low level American officials, is that he (Mr Kayani) is paying no heed to US demand for decisive action against terrorists’ safe heavens in North Waziristan.

In a report published in the New York Times by Jane Perlez, another attempt was made to malign the Pakistan Army. The report said: “General Kayani, angered by the inept handling of the country’s devastating floods and alarmed by a collapse of the economy, is pushing for a shake-up of the elected government, and in the longer term, the removal of President Asif Ali Zardari and his top lieutenants”.

But in the second paragraph, the author of the report denies his own fact by saying: “The military, preoccupied by a war against militants and reluctant to assume direct responsibility for the economic crisis, has made it clear it is not eager to take over the government, as it has many times before”.

Which part of the report should one trust is one’s dilemma. The logical answer to this illogical reporting is that why the military or its chief would push for a shakeup or for that matter ouster of President Zardari if it is not willing to take over control.

The NYT reporter further quotes from the meeting of Gen Kayani with both the president and the prime minister on Monday and alleges that the COAS confronted the participants of the meeting over incompetence and corruption in the government. He did not stop here but also alleged that General Kayani demanded of them to dismiss some federal ministers.

But the fact of the matter is that Indo-US media is not willing to forgive Gen Kayani for taking a nationalistic line on major issues. Firstly; he refused to withdraw troops from the Eastern border with India and deploy them on the Western front as was demanded by the US to appease the Indian leadership.

Secondly, Gen Kayani was very critical of the provisions of the Kerry-Lugar Bill and it was for the first time in Pakistan’s 63-year history that the Inter-Services Public Relations Directorate (ISPR) came out with a written statement expressing Army’s indignation over certain provisions regarding promotions and postings of senior officers to be reported to the US in advance.

Thirdly; General Kayani categorically refused to oblige the American demand to launch operation in North Waziristan soon after successful military strike in South Waziristan. His argument was that he troops need a breathing space to prepare for another offensive. This certainly displeased the American leadership and US media did not hesitate to express this displeasure in its reports, columns and editorials.

Fourthly; it was General Kayani who did not agree with Interior Minister Rehman Malik decision to send the ISI Director General to India in connection with investigation of Mumbai attacks accused. This nationalistic approach shocked New Dehli. It was a very daring decision on part of Gen Kayani since he was aware that Rehman Malik was acting on the directives of the president and the prime minister.

Finally, the COAS has restricted access of the American troops to fly over freely in Pakistani airspace on the pretext of supplying and distributing relief goods to the flood victims. It is generally believed that the aircraft and helicopter to be used by the American forces were fitted with espionage and sensitive camera equipments.

In view of the above mentioned facts, it is easier to understand why the Indo-US media has targeted General Kayani to malign him in imaginative situations. It is, without an iota of doubt, an attempt to discredit the otherwise a highly professional general.

Sovereignty vs. ‘Sovereign guarantees’

Sovereignty vs. ‘Sovereign guarantees’

How far is the Pakistani state prepared to go to undermining its national sovereignty and the safety of the lives of its citizens? Since 2004 mainly innocent Pakistani citizens have been killed by US drone strikes inside Pakistan. This is beyond the list of those Pakistanis handed over to the US in renditions by the Musharraf government, the most high profile being Dr Aafia. The claim that she was not handed over, but was whisked away by US covert operatives reflects even more badly on that state of our security establishment – that they cannot protect their own citizens in their own country from being kidnapped by foreign agencies!
Coming back to the drones, the advent of Obama to the Presidency led to an immediate upsurge of drone attacks, and as the US has always maintained, these attacks have the permission and cooperation of the Pakistan civilian leadership and its military. As a result, despite a national consensus against these drones, they continue to kill Pakistanis and the government continues with its lies to the people on this issue. This month, September, has seen the highest number of drone attacks for any month since the attacks began in 2004, with 20 strikes recorded so far and the month is not yet over.

Accompanying the drone attacks has been the growing presence of US overt and covert operatives across the length and breadth of Pakistan. This includes not only US Special Forces personnel, but also CIA, FBI operatives and the worse of the lot – the private contractors Dyncorps and Xe (formerly Blackwater) aided and abetted by Pakistani mercenaries. And, not a squeak of protest from Pakistani officialdom. It is as if the whole state machinery has become an amalgam of mercenaries selling out Pakistan and its people.
The argument from the pres-ent political government is that they are merely implementing the sovereign guarantees given by the Musharraf regime to the US, but this is not plausible because the same government has also been claiming it is undoing the dictatorial legacies of the Musharraf government.

In any case, how can this democratically elected government abide by sovereign guarantees to allow the killing of its own people? This is not to deny the presence of militants and even terrorists but they must be dealt with by our own people and under the law of the land. The state and government cannot abdicate their own responsibility towards its citizens – especially not a democratic government that has come to power – as they never tire of telling us these days – by a mandate from the people. Worse still is, killing someone simply on suspicion of being a potential militant. But then the President’s remarks on the collateral damage being done by drones, as cited in Bob Woodward’s book, Obama’s Wars says it all for the political dispensation.

As for the military, its justification of not protecting its citizens and territory against attacks by the US military in the form of drone attacks is even more absurd – that they are simply following orders of the civilian government. What instructions were they following in Musharraf’s times? In any case, this country sacrifices a lot to sustain a heavy defence budget so that its armed forces are given the best of everything. But in return they expect this military to defend its borders and its citizens from external military attacks – not to support them and turn on its own people under external diktat.

The armed forces may argue that they act on the directions of the federal government as directed under Article 245 of the Constitution which states: The armed forces shall, under the directions of the federal government, defend Pakistan against external aggression or threat of war…
So the questions that arise for us citizens are:

One, if the federal government tells the armed forces to allow foreign aggression against the country, will the armed forces comply? Is that what is happening right now?

Two, can the federal government legally take such a step? If so, who will defend the country against foreign aggression in the final analysis?
Incidentally, while many of us naively assumed the armed forces took an oath to defend Pakistan and its territory from its enemies and so on, when one sees the actual oath of the armed forces in Schedule III of the Constitution, it says nothing of the sort at all – they take an oath to defend the Constitution of Pakistan and not to indulge in any political activity – but nowhere are the words defence of territory or people in the oath! Frankly, after examining Article 245 and the armed forces oath, as a citizen of Pakistan I do not feel as secure as I thought I was because tomorrow if the federal government orders the military to hand over our defence to an external power and even our nuclear assets, where will we be?

These issues are critical now, because with the complicity of the Pakistani state, the US drone attacks are not the only external aggression we are now facing. NATO has decided to target Pakistanis in our own territory and their helicopter gunships have been having an open season on the FATA people. A few whimperings from the Pakistani state have been heard but we still have to wait and see whether our defence forces will defend our borders against this expansion of external military aggression against Pakistan and its people.
Ironically, NATO has defended its forays into Pakistan as “right of self-defence”, while the Pakistanis seem to have no such right on their own territory! To confuse the issue, NATO is using the reference of ISAF and a UN mandate, when we all know that ISAF is not NATO and that NATO forcibly grabbed the ISAF UN mandate. The question of its legitimacy in the context of Afghanistan is critical because it has been expanding its mandate and operational milieu ever since the end of bipolarity.

So, why should there be an issue of its legitimacy within the context of Afghanistan? Because it is an out-of-area operation. NATO still remains, in legal terms, a collective defence organisation in terms of its legitimacy through the UN system – under Chapter VIII, Articles 52 and 53, as well as Chapter VII’s notion of collective self-defence as embodied in Article 51, which provides a very clear and limited framework for collective defence organisations….Regional collective defence organisations need to operate in the specific region of their membership since decision-making is restricted to this membership. Given the continuing European-Atlantic membership of NATO, it is somewhat disturbing to see NATO transforming itself from a collective defence organisation (Article 5 of the NATO Charter is surely in the context of collective defence?) to a collective security organisation to serve the interests of its membership or perhaps future “coalitions of the willing”. There is no legitimacy for any collective security organisation other than the UN with its universal membership.

Even within the context of regional organisations, actions have to have a UN mandate and this is where the case of Afghanistan is unclear. Post-9/11, the UN Security Council, through Resolution 1386 (December 2001), sanctioned the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) for Afghanistan. As stipulated in the Bonn Agreement of December 2001, the progressive expansion of the ISAF to other urban centres and other areas beyond Kabul was duly approved through follow-on UNSC resolutions.

So, where did NATO get into ISAF? Did the UNSC initiate NATO’s involvement or did NATO present a fait accompli to the UN Secretary General? What is available on record is that NATO informed the UN Secretary General, through a letter dated October 2, 2003, from its Secretary General that on August 11, 2003, NATO had assumed “strategic command, control and coordination of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).” This was followed by another letter from the NATO Secretary General to the UN SG informing the latter of the North Atlantic Council’s agreement on a “longer-term strategy for NATO in its International Assistance Force (ISAF) role in Afghanistan.” Both these letters were sent to the President of the UNSC by the then UN Secretary General Kofi Annan on October 7 with the request that they be brought to the attention of the UNSC. So, effectively NATO presented the UNSC with a fait accompli – which is why its presence in Afghanistan is legally questionable.

Meanwhile, for Pakistan the basic question that its civil and military leaders must answer is: How far will the state compromise the safety of its people and its own sovereignty to fulfil the so-called “sovereign guarantees” to the US? Shireen Mazari. The Nation.

Terrorist Threat Has Roots in U.S. Policy

Terrorist Threat Has Roots in U.S. Policy

by Sheldon RichmanSeptember 28, 2010“While al-Qaeda continues to threaten America directly, it also inspires its affiliates and other groups and individuals who share its violent ideology…. Homegrown terrorists represent a new and changing facet of the terrorist threat. To be clear, by ‘homegrown,’ I mean terrorist operatives who are U.S. persons and who were radicalized in the United States….”

With those words Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano updated Congress on America’s perilous condition. She wasn’t quite accurate, however.

It is not al-Qaeda that inspires affiliates and radicalizes homegrown terrorists. It is America’s violent policies in the Muslim world. Other government officials have acknowledged that Muslim radicals seek revenge for those policies in the Middle East, Africa, and Central Asia, but Napolitano perpetuates the myth that anti-American activity is unprovoked. The American people deserve to hear the truth.

Napolitano referred to recent unsuccessful attacks in the United States: “Other al-Qaeda affiliates have actually attempted to attack the homeland in recent months. These include Tehrik-e Taliban (TTP) [Pakistan] and al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) [Yemen] — which, until their respective claims of responsibility for the attempted Times Square and Christmas Day terrorist attacks, had only conducted attacks in their regions.”

What she left out was that the U.S. government regularly fires missiles into Pakistan and Yemen from aerial drones, killing innocent people. The desire for revenge is a natural consequence.

Napolitano also warned of al-Shabaab in Somalia, which has taken responsibility for recent bombings in Uganda. But she neglected to mention both U.S. and Ugandan military intervention in Somalia, another Muslim country. Are we to be surprised that young naturalized Somali-Americans would feel impelled to go back to their native country to resist American aggression?

Why won’t Napolitano acknowledge that the American empire provokes anti-Americanism? This isn’t rocket science. You bomb someone; they get mad and try to get even. Terrorism is the price paid for maintaining an empire. But the imperial masters apparently think it’s worth the price. They never suffer; on the contrary, they prosper when they can use the violence to justify further expansion of their power.

And so it goes on, like a perpetual-motion machine. Each act of the empire provokes a response that serves as a pretext for further imperial action. The battlefield is the world, and the “war on terror” can go on forever. Except for the dead, the maimed, the malnourished, and the taxpayers, it’s a sweet deal all around.

That “terrorism” is really vengeance (wrongly exacted from civilians) for earlier crimes of the empire should come as no shock, though it undoubtedly will. Nevertheless, even the mainstream press has let us in on some relevant facts.

“In roughly a dozen countries — from the deserts of North Africa, to the mountains of Pakistan, to former Soviet republics crippled by ethnic and religious strife — the United States has significantly increased military and intelligence operations, pursuing the enemy using robotic drones and commando teams, paying contractors to spy and training local operatives to chase terrorists,” the New York Times reported last month.

“While the stealth war began in the Bush administration, it has expanded under President Obama, who rose to prominence in part for his early opposition to the invasion of Iraq. Virtually none of the newly aggressive steps undertaken by the United States government have been publicly acknowledged. In contrast with the troop buildup in Afghanistan, which came after months of robust debate, for example, the American military campaign in Yemen began without notice in December and has never been officially confirmed.”

In other words, America’s fraudulent peace president is using the paramilitary CIA to fight secret wars. They may be described as attacks on “the enemy,” but they inevitably kill innocents — while unfailingly recruiting new militants bent on revenge. In the U.S. government’s code book, “the enemy” is anyone who opposes a U.S. military presence in his country.

Who would trust the intelligence agencies to identify actual terrorists, anyway? As Andrew Bacevich, professor of international relations at Boston University, notes, “After September 11, Iraq, Katrina, the financial meltdown, etc., a bit of modestly might be in order.”

If the terrorist threat is as real as Napolitano says it is, there’s a way to diminish or end it: U.S. out of the Muslim world.

Sheldon Richman is senior fellow at The Future of Freedom Foundation, author of Tethered Citizens: Time to Repeal the Welfare State, and editor ofThe Freeman magazine. Visit his blog “Free Association” Send him email.