China asks Pakistan, other countries to unearth links with Urumqi violence

[SEE: Writer claims that Hizbut Tahrir is Russian asset. Hizb ut-Tahrir: KGB-FSB Connection?]

China asks Pakistan, other countries to unearth links with Urumqi violence

Saibal Dasgupta, TNN

BEIJING: Even as additional security personnel and machinery poured into Urumqi, the Chinese foreign ministry has got into action asking several

Slamming Urumqi violence

Supporters of Pakistani religious party Hizbut Tahrir rally to condemn Urumqi violence, in Lahore. (AP Photo)

countries including Pakistan to prove their friendship by taking a stand on the issue.

Beijing wants several countries to unearth the links between their citizens and the World Uyghur Congress.

A worried Hu Jintao, secretary-general of the Communist Party of China and the country’s president left the G8 summit in Italy and rushed back to Beijing on Tuesday night as it dawned on Chinese authorities that the Urumqi violence might set off a chain reaction and eventually affect the party position.

The Communist Party boss of Urumqi said the local government will seek death penalty for those involved in the killing of 156 people during the orgy of violence on Sunday. Li Zhi, the local party boss, said the streets of the city are totally under the control of security forces.

The authorities also launched a concentrated effort to connect with all communities with the help of leaflets dropped from airplanes and appeals made through loud speakers telling people to stay calm and eschew violence.

Li made a significant revelation saying most of those detained for the violence were young students. This may not be good news for authorities, who were hoping that the young would be charmed by promises of modern development instead of carrying forward the old struggle for an independent East Turkmenistan nation.

A section of Uyghur Muslims have been demanding a separate nation in the northwest Chinese region of Xinjiang for many years.

China wants several countries including Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Turkey, Germany and the United States to help unearth links between their local citizens and the World Uyghur Congress, which Beijing considers to be behind the violence in Urumqi. One report suggested that foreign ministry officials are in talks with envoys of Afghanistan posted in Beijing on the issue.

The government had earlier issued a white paper, which showed that a large number of Xinjiang terrorists have been trained in training bases in Pakistan. The Turkic speaking Uygurs have close links with Kazakhstan and Turkey while the WUC operates from Germany and United States.

Russia came out with a statement confirming that it “views the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region as an inalienable part of the People’s Republic of China and considers that events there are purely the internal affair of China”. The statement was apparently issued after persuasion from Beijing.

The moves suggest that China has further evidence about rioters in Urumqi getting support from sources based in foreign countries. But reports from the northwestern city suggest that there was still a high level of fear and distrust among both the Ughyur and majority Han communities about a possible reoccurrence of violence.

Bombshell: Bin Laden worked for US till 9/11

[Unfolding events in China’s Uighur Region apparently relate to the Turkish “Deep State” revelations and the IMU {Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan}, which connect all the “Islamic” struggles from Pakistan to Chechnya,  confirming circumstantially, the revelations coming from the Sibel Edmonds.  I have resisted forming an opinion on her work until now, but in light of the direction the pipeline wars in Central Asia are taking, please consider the following report.]

Bombshell: Bin Laden worked for US till 9/11

Former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds dropped a bombshell on the Mike Malloy radio show, guest-hosted by Brad Friedman (audio, partial transcript).

In the interview, Sibel says that the US maintained ‘intimate relations’ with Bin Laden, and the Taliban, “all the way until that day of September 11.”

These ‘intimate relations’ included using Bin Laden for ‘operations’ in Central Asia, including Xinjiang, China. These ‘operations’ involved using al Qaeda and the Taliban in the same manner “as we did during the Afghan and Soviet conflict,” that is, fighting ‘enemies’ via proxies.

As Sibel has previously described, and as she reiterates in this latest interview, this process involved using Turkey (with assistance from ‘actors from Pakistan, and Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia’) as a proxy, which in turn used Bin Laden and the Taliban and others as a proxy terrorist army.

Control of Central Asia
The goals of the American ‘statesmen’ directing these activities included control of Central Asia’s vast energy supplies and new markets for military products.

The Americans had a problem, though. They needed to keep their fingerprints off these operations to avoid a) popular revolt in Central Asia ( Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan), and b) serious repercussions from China and Russia. They found an ingenious solution: Use their puppet-state Turkey as a proxy, and appeal to both pan-Turkic and pan-Islam sensibilities.

Turkey, a NATO ally, has a lot more credibility in the region than the US and, with the history of the Ottoman Empire, could appeal to pan-Turkic dreams of a wider sphere of influence. The majority of the Central Asian population shares the same heritage, language and religion as the Turks.

In turn, the Turks used the Taliban and al Qaeda, appealing to their dreams of a pan-Islamic caliphate (Presumably. Or maybe the Turks/US just paid very well.)

According to Sibel:

This started more than a decade-long illegal, covert operation in Central Asia by a small group in the US intent on furthering the oil industry and the Military Industrial Complex, using Turkish operatives, Saudi partners and Pakistani allies, furthering this objective in the name of Islam.

Uighurs
Sibel was recently asked to write about the recent situation with the Uighurs in Xinjiang, but she declined, apart from saying that “our fingerprint is all over it.”

Of course, Sibel isn’t the first or only person to recognize any of this. Eric Margolis, one of the best reporters in the West on matters of Central Asia, stated that the Uighurs in the training camps in Afghanistan up to 2001:

“were being trained by Bin Laden to go and fight the communist Chinese in Xinjiang, and this was not only with the knowledge, but with the support of the CIA, because they thought they might use them if war ever broke out with China.”

And also that:

“Afghanistan was not a hotbed of terrorism, these were commando groups, guerrilla groups, being trained for specific purposes in Central Asia.”

In a separate interview, Margolis said:

“That illustrates Henry Kissinger’s bon mot that the only thing more dangerous than being America’s enemy is being an ally, because these people were paid by the CIA, they were armed by the US, these Chinese Muslims from Xinjiang, the most-Western province.

The CIA was going to use them in the event of a war with China, or just to raise hell there, and they were trained and supported out of Afghanistan, some of them with Osama Bin Laden’s collaboration. The Americans were up to their ears with this.”
Rogues Gallery
Last year, Sibel came up with a brilliant idea to expose some of the criminal activity that she is forbidden to speak about: she published eighteen photos, titled “Sibel Edmonds’ State Secrets Privilege Gallery,” of people involved the operations that she has been trying to expose. One of those people is Anwar Yusuf Turani, the so-called ‘President-in-exile’ of East Turkistan (Xinjiang). This so-called ‘government-in-exile’ was ‘established‘ on Capitol Hill in September, 2004, drawing a sharp rebuke from China.

Also featured in Sibel’s Rogues Gallery was ‘former’ spook Graham Fuller, who was instrumental in the establishment of Turani’s ‘government-in-exile’ of East Turkistan. Fuller has written extensively on Xinjiang, and his “Xinjiang Project” for Rand Corp is apparently the blueprint for Turani’s government-in-exile. Sibel has openly stated her contempt for Mr. Fuller.

Susurluk
The Turkish establishment has a long history of mingling matters of state with terrorism, drug trafficking and other criminal activity, best exemplified by the 1996 Susurluk incident which exposed the so-called Deep State.

Sibel states that “a few main Susurluk actors also ended up in Chicago where they centered ‘certain’ aspects of their operations (Especially East Turkistan-Uighurs).”

One of the main Deep State actors, Mehmet Eymur, former Chief of Counter-Terrorism for Turkey’s intelligence agency, the MIT, features in Sibel’s Rogues Gallery. Eymur was given exile in the US. Another member of Sibel’s gallery, Marc Grossman was Ambassador to Turkey at the time that the Susurluk incident exposed the Deep State. He was recalled shortly after, prior to the end of his assignment, as was Grossman’s underling, Major Douglas Dickerson, who later tried to recruit Sibel into the spying ring.

The modus operandi of the Susurluk gang is the same as the activities that Sibel describes as taking place in Central Asia, the only difference is that this activity was exposed in Turkey a decade ago, whereas the organs of the state in the US, including the corporate media, have successfully suppressed this story.

Chechnya, Albania & Kosovo
Central Asia is not the only place where American foreign policy makers have shared interests with Bin Laden. Consider the war in Chechnya. As I documented here, Richard Perle and Stephen Solarz (both in Sibel’s gallery) joined other leading neocon luminaries such as Elliott Abrams, Kenneth Adelman, Frank Gaffney, Michael Ledeen, James Woolsey, and Morton Abramowitz in a group called the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya (ACPC). For his part, Bin Laden donated $25 million to the cause, as well as numerous fighters, and technical expertise, establishing training camps.

US interests also converged with those of al-Qaeda in Kosovo and Albania.

Of course, it is not uncommon for circumstances to arise where ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend.’ On the other hand, in a transparent democracy, we expect a full accounting of the circumstances leading up to a tragic event like 9/11. The 9/11 Commission was supposed to provide exactly that.

State Secrets
Sibel has famously been dubbed the most gagged woman in America, having the State Secrets Privilege imposed on her twice. Her 3.5 hour testimony to the 9/11 Commission has been entirely suppressed, reduced to a single footnote which refers readers to her classified testimony.

In the interview, she says that the information that was classified in her case specifically identifies that the US was using Bin Laden and the Taliban in Central Asia, including Xinjiang. In the interview, Sibel reiterates that when invoking the gag orders, the US government claims that it is protecting ” ‘sensitive diplomatic relations,’ protecting Turkey, protecting Israel, protecting Pakistan, protecting Saudi Arabia…” This is no doubt partially true, but it is also true that they are protecting themselves too, and it is a crime in the US to use classification and secrecy to cover up crimes.

As Sibel says in the interview:

I have information about things that our government has lied to us about… those things can be proven as lies, very easily, based on the information they classified in my case, because we did carry very intimate relationship with these people, and it involves Central Asia, all the way up to September 11.


Summary

The bombshell here is obviously that certain people in the US were using Bin Laden up to September 11, 2001.

It is important to understand why: the US outsourced terror operations to al Qaeda and the Taliban for many years, promoting the Islamization of Central Asia in an attempt to personally profit off military sales as well as oil and gas concessions.

The silence by the US government on these matters is deafening. So, too, is the blowback.

Destabilising China: What really happened at Urumqi on July 5?

Destabilising China: What really happened at Urumqi on July 5?

Zou Yonghong
The Hindu
Fri, 31 Jul 2009 23:46 UTC

© Pang Li

Evidence shows that the riot was premeditated and that it was remotely manipulated and instigated by separatist forces from abroad.

The recent violent crimes involving beating, smashing, looting, and arson in Urumqi, capital city of Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region in North West China, have drawn much attention of the international community. A large number of innocent civilians and armed policemen were killed and many others injured.

What is the reality of this incident? In the evening of July 5, 2009, gangs of rioters, many with clubs, knives, and stones rampaged into streets and small lanes in the city and on the outskirts of Urumqi from different directions. The rioters assaulted people they saw, set fire to buildings, and smashed or burned vehicles and shops they came up to. They committed brutal violence on 220 sites and caused severe casualties and property loss.

Even pregnant women and young girls were not spared. According to statistics by 11 p.m., July 10, the riot left 184 people dead, 1,080 injured, 260 vehicles damaged, and 209 shops and 2 blocks of building burnt down with 56,850 square meters of floor space scorched.

In order to protect the people’s life and property and to maintain social stability at Urumqi, the government of the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region took decisive actions in time to rescue the injured and to track down and arrest the outlaws. As soon as the riot occurred, the Chinese government facilitated access to Urumqi by the foreign media in the hope that the international community could find out what really happened there.

The situation has been brought under control and efforts are being made to deal with the aftermath of the violence. The temporary traffic curfew has been lifted and life in the city has returned to normal.

The background to the incident, which did not happen by chance, is complex. On June 26, a brawl took place in a toy factory in Shaoguan City, Guangdong Province between migrant workers from Xinjiang and local workers. That was a non-criminal case related to public order and was settled in a timely and just way. But the World Uyghur Congress, an overseas East Turkestan organisation headed by ethnic separatist Rebiya Kadeer, used the incident to stir up ethnic antagonism. It tried to instigate insurgencies through the Internet and other channels, calling for “bolder actions” and “something big.”

Asserting that “something serious will happen in Urumqi on 5 July,” Rebiya Kadeer asked her followers to pay close attention to what was going on. Deplorably, some people with ulterior motives inside the country colluded with the World Uyghur Congress and began to post appeals on the Internet on the night of July 4. They called on people to gather at the South Gate and Renmin Square of Urumqi by 5 p.m. on Sunday for a “demonstration” in response to the call of the World Uyghur Congress. Such evidence shows that the riot was a premeditated and organised violent crime committed by separatists within the country, but with remote manipulation and instigation by separatist forces from abroad.

On the second day of the riot, more than 150 “Eastern Turkestan” activists attacked the Chinese Embassy in the Netherlands, damaging Embassy facilities and posing a severe threat to the staff and property. The Chinese Consulate-General in the German city of Munich was also attacked by unidentified persons. Was not this further evidence that Eastern Turkestan groups from within and outside China are working in collusion to undermine the unity and stability of the country?

“But haven’t the World Uyghur Congress and Rebiya Kadeer always claimed that they are never involved in violence and terrorism?” is a question that is sometimes raised. Those claims are false. This year, the World Uyghur Congress has been preparing for its third conference, which, according to Rebiya Kadeer, will work out plans of infiltration and sabotage targeting the celebrations of the 60th anniversary of the People’s Republic of China. Furthermore, a “three-step initiative for Xinjiang independence in 50 years” has also been plotted.

People may wonder what China has to say about the concerns of some foreign human rights groups that those arrested might face unfair trial or even persecution by the Chinese government. Why are these so-called human rights advocacy groups not expressing any sympathy for those innocent civilians who fell victim to the brutal criminals? It is precisely to protect the life and property of people of all ethnicities in Xinjiang that the Chinese law enforcement departments arrested law-breakers with legal procedures. No government in the world will sit idle watching innocent people being killed or allow such serious violence to happen without taking any action. China is a law-based country and all criminals will be punished in strict accordance with the law.

Will China change its ethnic policy? It is a multi-ethnic country. Historically, various ethnic groups in the country have shared weal and woe and forged a close and interdependent kinship as one united people. We take a clear-cut stance in opposing national secessionism and terrorist acts. This is for the sake of national unity and social harmony and stability and is in the utmost interest of the Chinese people, including the 21 million residents of various ethnic groups in Xinjiang.

Xinjiang today is seeing vigorous development in various aspects. The people there enjoy a peaceful life with unity and harmony among different ethnic groups. This has been made possible through our adherence to the policy of regional autonomy for ethnic minorities. What has just happened in Urumqi was surely against our will. But the incident indicates more than ever that we must redouble our efforts to safeguard the favourable conditions on which people of all ethnic groups can work in unity and pursue common prosperity. We are determined to cherish social and political harmony and stability, and stay firmly committed to the existing ethnic policy.

Zou Yonghong is Press Officer at the Chinese Embassy in New Delhi.

The Strategy of Tension–NATO’s Hidden Terrorism

The Strategy of Tension

NATO’s Hidden Terrorism

by Silvia Cattori*

Daniele Ganser, professor of contemporary history at Bale University (Switzerland) and chairman of the ASPO – Switzerland, published a landmark book about “NATO’s Secret Armies.” According to him, during the last 50 years the United States have organized bombings in Western Europe that they have falsely attributed to the left and the extreme left with the purpose of discrediting them in the eyes of their voters. This strategy is still present today, inspiring fear for the Islam and justifying wars on oil.



22 January 2007

From
Zurich (Switzerland)

Tools

 Print
 Send

All the versions of this article:

 français
 Deutsch
 italiano
 русский
 Português
 Español

Countries
 NATO

Themes
 Covert Action: government overthrows, psychological warfare…

JPEG - 19.7 kb
Daniele Ganser

Silvia Cattori: Your book about NATO’s Secret Armies [1] explains that the strategy of tension [2] and the False Flag terrorism [3] imply great dangers. It teaches us how NATO – together with the intelligence services or the West European countries and the Pentagon – utilised secret armies during the Cold War, hired spies among the extreme right wing, and organized terrorist acts for which they blamed the left. Becoming aware of this, we can wonder about what is likely to happen today behind our back.

Daniele Ganser: It is extremely important to understand what the strategy of tension truly represents the way it works nowadays. This can help us clarify the present and to see more clearly to what extent it is still in action. Only a few people know what the expression ’strategy of tension’ means. It is very important to talk about it, to explain it. It is a tactic that involves carrying out criminal acts and attributing them to someone else. By the term ’tension’, we mean emotional tension, all that which creates a feeling of tension.
By ’strategy’ we make reference to that which increases people’s fear in regard to a determined group. These secret structures of NATO had been equipped, financed and trained by the CIA, in coordination with the M16 (the British secret service), to fight against the Army of the Soviet Union in a case of war, but also according to the information to which he have access today, to commit terrorist acts in several countries [4]. That is how, since the 70s, the Italian secret services have been using these armies to foment terrorist attacks, with the purpose of causing fear among the population, and later, to accuse the communists of being the authors. The strategy of tension was designed to serve the purpose or discrediting, weakening and stopping communism from reaching executive power.

Silvia Cattori: To learn what it means is one thing. But it is still difficult to believe that our government could have let NATO, the West European intelligence agencies and the CIA act in such a way that could threaten their own citizens’ security!

Daniele Ganser: NATO was at the core of this clandestine network linked to terror; the Clandestine Planning Committee (CPC) and the Allied Clandestine Committee (ACC) were two substructures of the Atlantic Alliance, and they are clearly identified today. But, now that this has been established, it is still hard to know who was doing what. There are not any documents proving who was at the head, who organized the strategy of tension, how NATO, the West European intelligence services, the CIA, M16, and the hired terrorists among the extreme right, distributed each other’s roles. The only certainty that we have is that there was, inside these clandestine structures, some elements that used the strategy of tension. The terrorists from the extreme right have explained in their statements that it was NATO’s secret services that had supported them in this clandestine war. But when we ask for explanations from some members of the CIA or NATO – which I have done for many years – they limit themselves to say that it could be possible that a few criminal elements might have managed to avoid control.

Silvia Cattori: Were these secret armies active in every Western European country?

Daniele Ganser: In my research, I put forward evidence that these secret armies not only existed in Italy, but also in all Western Europe: in France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Turkey, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Switzerland, Greece, Luxembourg and Germany. In the beginning, we thought that there existed only one guerrilla-structured organization, and therefore, that all these secret armies had participated in the strategy of tension, and therefore, in terrorist acts. However, it is important to know that not all these secret armies have been involved in attacks, and to understand what differentiated them.
What appears to be clear today, is that NATO’s clandestine structures, usually called ’Stay Behind groups’ [5], were created in the beginning to act as a guerrilla in case of an occupation of Western Europe by the Soviet Union. The United States stated that the guerrilla networks were necessary to overcome the lack of preparedness of the countries attacked by Germany.
Several of the countries that were occupied by the Germans, like Norway, wanted to learn the lessons of their incapacity to resist the occupier, and they said to themselves that, in case of a new occupation, they had to be better prepared, to have another option at hand and to count with a secret army in case that the official one were to be defeated. Inside these secret armies, there were honest people, sincere patriots, who only wanted to defend their countries from an occupation.

Silvia Cattori: If I understand well, these Stay Behind groups, whose original goal was to be prepared in case of a Soviet invasion, have been deviated from that goal and were reorganised to defeat the left. From that, it is difficult to understand why the left parties have not investigated this or denounced this earlier.

Daniele Ganser: When we take the case of Italy, it appears that, every time that the communist party has interviewed the government to find an explanation about the secret army that was operating in this country under the coded name of Gladio [6], there was never any answer, under the pretext that it was a ’state secret’. It wasn’t until 1990 that Giulio Andreotti [7] recognised the existence of Gladio and its direct links with NATO, the CIA, and M16 [8]. _ It is also during that time that the judge Felice Casson was able to prove that the true author of the bombing in Peteano in 1972, that had shocked Italy, and that had been attributed up to that moment to the extreme left militants, was Vincenzo Vinciguerra, linked to ’Ordine Nuovo’, a group of the extreme right wing. Vinciguerra avoided blame for the bombing in Peteano with the help of the Italian secret services. Vinciguerra also spoke about the existence of this secret army, Gladio. He explained that, during the Cold War, these clandestine acts had caused the death of women and children [9]. He stated as well that this secret army controlled by NATO, had branches all around Europe. When this information was released, there was a political crisis in Italy. And it is thanks to the investigations of the judge Felice Casson that we got to know about NATO’s secret armies.

In Germany, when in 1990 the SPDs (German Social Democrat Partisans) became aware that in their country – as well as in all the other European countries – there was a secret army, and that this structure was linked to the German secret services, they loudly denounced it as a scandal and accused the Christian democratic Party (CDU). This party reacted by saying: “If you accuse us, we are going to say that, you too, together with Willy Brandt, you have been involved in this conspiracy”. This happened at the same time as the first elections of the reunified Germany, which the SPD hoped to win. The leaders of the SPD understood that that was not a good electoral subject; in the end, the story was twisted in such a way as to make the existence of these secret armies seem justified.
In the European Parliament, in November 1990, many members exclaimed that the existence of such clandestine armies could not be tolerated and that the European people needed to know the true origin of terrorist acts and that an inquiry was needed. Therefore, the European Parliament wrote a complaint to NATO and to president George Bush Senior. But nothing was done. It is only in Italy, Belgium and Switzerland that there have been public queries. And they are the only three countries that have set some order in this subject, and that have published a report about their secret armies.

Silvia Cattori: What about today ? Are these secret armies still active? Is it possible that there exist secret national structures which escape the control of each State?

Daniele Ganser: For a historian, it is difficult to answer that question. We haven’t got an official report of each country. In my books, I analyse some facts that I can prove. Concerning Italy, there is a report stating that the secret army Gladio has been destroyed. About the existence of the secret army P26 in Switzerland, a report was also issued by the Parliament, in November 1990. Therefore, these clandestine armies, which had stocked explosives in hidden places everywhere in Switzerland, have been dissolved.
But in the other countries, nothing was done. In France, while president François Mitterrand stated that all that belonged to the past, we discovered later that these secret structures had always been present when Giulio Andreotti suggested that the French president was lying: “You say that the secret armies do not exist anymore; but, during 1990’s secret meeting in the autumn, you, the French, were also present; don’t say that this doesn’t exist anymore.” Mitterrand became quite angry with this Andreotti because, after this revelation, he was forced to rectify his statement. Later, the head of the French secret services, admiral Pierre Lacoste, confirmed that these secret armies existed in France as well, and that France had also been involved in terrorist attacks. [10]. It is therefore difficult to say whether all this has been solved or not. And, even if the Gladio structures have been dissolved, new armies might have been created, still utilizing this technique of the strategy of tension and the False flags.

Silvia Cattori: Can we speculate that, after the fall of the USSR, the United States and NATO have continued developing the strategy of tension and of the false flags in other fronts?

Daniele Ganser: My research is based in the period of the Cold War in Europe. But it is known that there have also been false flags in other places, where the States’ responsibility was proved. For example: the Iran bombings in 1953, for which the communist Iranians were blamed at first. So it happened that the CIA and the Mi6 had used some agents provocateurs to orchestrate the overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh’s administration, within the framework of the war, to control the oil. Another example: the bombings in Egypt, in 1954, for which the Muslims were accused first. It was proved later that, in what was called the Lavon affair [11], it was the agents of Mossad who had been the perpetrators. This time, it was for Israel to stop the British troops from leaving Egypt, to make them stay there, and also to ensure the protection of Israel. Therefore, we have examples in history showing that the strategy of tension and the false flags have been used by the US, Great Britain and Israel. Given that throughout their history other countries have also used the same strategy, the research must continue in these fields.

Silvia Cattori: These clandestine structures of NATO, created after the Second World War, to supply the European countries with a guerrilla capable of resisting the Soviet invasion, ended up serving nothing but to build criminal operations against the European Citizens? Everything leads to the thought that the United States have another purpose!

Daniele Ganser: You are right in raising this question. The United States were interested in the political control. This political control is an essential element of Washington and London’s strategy. General Geraldo Serravalle, at the head of Gladio, the Italian network Stay-behind, gives an example of this in his book. He tells us that he understood that the United States were not interested in the preparation of the guerrillas against an eventual Soviet invasion, when he saw that, what interested the CIA agents who went to the training exercises of the secret army that he was leading, was to make sure that the army worked, could control the communist militants. Their fear was that the communists took the power in countries such a Greece, Italy and France. Therefore, the strategy of tension was meant to serve that purpose: to orient and influence the politics of certain countries of Western Europe.

Silvia Cattori: You have talked about an important emotional factor in the strategy of tension. Therefore, the terror, whose origin is vague, uncertain, the fear that it causes, all that helps to manipulate the public opinion. Are we not assisting today to the same kind of procedure? Yesterday, we fuelled the fear of communism, today aren’t we fuelling the fear of Islam?

Daniele Ganser: Yes, there is a very clear parallel. During the planning of the war in Iraq, it was said that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons in his possession, that there was a link between Iraq and the Al-Qaeda terrorists. But none of that turned out to be true. By means of these lies, it was intended to make people believe that Muslims wanted to spread terrorism all around, and that this war was necessary to fight against terror. However, the true reason for this war is the control of energy resources. This is due to the fact that the geology, the richness in gas and oil, are concentrated in the Muslim countries. He who wants to monopolize them, must hide behind this type of manipulations.
We cannot say that there is not a lot of oil left because the global production – the ’peak oil’ [12] – is going to arrive probably before 2020, and that therefore oil must be taken from Iraq, because people would say that children must not be killed to obtain oil. And they are right. They can’t be told, either, that in the Caspian Sea there are huge reserves and that there is a plan to create a pipeline that would go to the Indian Ocean but, given that it’s is not allowed to go through the South of Iran or the North of Russia, it must pass through the East, Turkmenistan and Afghanistan, and therefore, this country must be under control. That is why Muslims are labelled as “terrorists”. It is all a big lie, but if it is repeated a thousand times that Muslims are “terrorists”, people will end up believing it and thinking that the wars against Muslims are useful; and to forget that there are several types of terrorism, that violence is not necessarily a feature of Islam.

Silvia Cattori: So, these clandestine structures might have well been dissolved, but the strategy of tension continues?

Daniele Ganser: Exactly. The structures might have been dissolved, and other ones could have been formed. It is important to explain how, in the strategy of tension, the tactic and manipulation work. None of that is legal. But, for the governments, it is easier to manipulate people than to tell them that they are trying to get hold of somebody else’s oil. Nevertheless, not all these attacks arise from the strategy of tension. But it is difficult to know which ones are the manipulated attacks. Even those who know the amount of attacks that have been manipulated by the governments to discredit a political enemy, can be confronted by a psychological obstacle. After every bombing, people are afraid, they feel confused. It is very difficult to accept the idea that the strategy of tension, the strategy of false flag, is a reality. It is easier to accept the manipulation and to say: “I have kept informed for 30 years, and I have never heard about these criminal armies. The Muslims are attacking us; this is why we fight against them.”

Silvia Cattori: Since 2001, the European Union has created anti-terrorist measures. Later, is has been seen that these measures have allowed the CIA to kidnap people, to move them to secrete places and torture them. Have the European States become a sort of hostages to their submission to the United States?

Daniele Ganser: The European countries have had quite a weak attitude concerning the United States after the attacks on September 11th, 2001. After having confirmed that the secret prisons were illegal, they let them continue. The same happened with the prisoners in Guantanamo. Many voices stood up in Europe to say: “The prisoners cannot be deprived of a lawyer or defence.” When Mrs. Angela Merkel mentioned this question, the United States clearly suggested that Germany was a little bit involved in Iraq, that its secret services had contributed to prepare this war, and therefore they must shut up.

Silvia Cattori: Within this context, where there are still many unclear areas, what type of security can NATO give to the peoples it is supposed to protect if it allows the secret services to manipulate in this way?

Daniele Ganser:Concerning the terrorist attacks carried out by the secret armies of the network Gladio during the Cold War, it is important that we are able to determine clearly which is the real implication of NATO in this, to know what really happened. Is this about isolated acts secretly organised by NATO? Until this day, NATO refuses to talk about the strategy of tension and terrorism during the Cold War. NATO refuses all questions related to Gladio.
Today, NATO is used as an offensive army, even though this organization was not created to play that role. It was activated in that sense on September 12th 2001, immediately after the attacks in New York. NATO’s leaders affirm that the reason for their involvement in the war against the Afghans is to fight against terrorism. However, NATO is in danger of losing that war. Therefore, when that happens they will be a big crisis, a debate. And this will allow us to know whether NATO is really fighting a war against terrorism, or if it is trying to create an analogous situation to that of the Cold War with the secret army Gladio, where she had a link to terror. The next few years will tell us if NATO has acted outside the mission that was accorded to it: to defend the European countries and the Unites States in case of Soviet invasion, an event that has never occurred. NATO was not funded to take over the oil and gas of the Muslim countries.

Silvia Cattori: We could understand that Israel, who is interested in widening the conflicts in the Arabic and Muslim countries, encourages the United States in that direction. But, we cannot see what it is that interests the European countries and that makes them engage their troops in the wars decided by the Pentagon, as was the case in Afghanistan.

Daniele Ganser: I think that Europe is confused. The United States are in a strong position, and the Europeans have a tendency to think that the best thing is to collaborate with the strongest one. But we would have to think about this more thoroughly. The European politicians give in easily to the pressure put by the US, who is always asking for more troops in this or that front. The more the European countries give in, the more they subordinate, and the more they will find themselves confronted to bigger and bigger problems. In Afghanistan the Germans and the British are under the command of the American army. Strategically, it is not an interesting position for these countries. Now, the US has asked the Germans to engage their soldiers in the South of Afghanistan as well, in the areas were the battle is the hardest. If the Germans accept, they take the risk of being massacred by the Afghan forces which refuse the presence of any king of occupier. _ Germany should ask itself seriously whether she should not rather withdraw their 3000 soldiers from Afghanistan. But, for the Germans, to disobey the US’ orders, to which they are a bit like lieges, it is a very hard step to make.

Silvia Cattori: How much do our current government know today about the strategy of tension ? Can they just let the war-doers foment coups d’état, kidnap and torture people without reacting? Have they any means to stop these criminal activities?

Daniele Ganser: I do not know. As an historian, I observe and take notes. As a political adviser, I always say that one must never give in to the manipulations that try to induce fear and to make people believe that the “terrorists” are always the Muslims; I say that this is about a struggle for controlling the energy resources; that some means of surviving the lack of energy must be found without needing to go to a militarization. Problems cannot be solved in this way; they only become worse.

Silvia Cattori: When we observe the demonisation of the Arabs and Muslims in the conflict between Israel and Palestine, we might think that this does not have anything to do with the oil.

Daniele Ganser: No. In this case not. But, in the US perspective, it is definitely about taking control of the energy reserves of the Eurasian block that is situated in a ’strategic ellipse’ that goes from Azerbaijan to Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait and the Persian Gulf, passing through Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan. It is precisely over there, in that region where this false war ’against terrorism’ is taking place, that the biggest oil and gas reserves are concentrated. In my opinion, it is not about anything else but a geo-strategic game inside which the European Union can do nothing but lose. Because, if the US takes hold of the resources, and the energy crisis becomes worse, it will tell them: “You want gas, you want oil. Very well, in exchange we want this and that.” The US is not going to give the oil and gas for free to the European countries. A few people know that the “peak oil”, the maximum production of oil in Europe – the production to Norway and Great Britain – is declining.
The day when people will realise that these wars ’against terrorism’ are manipulated, and that the accusations against the Muslims are, among other things, propaganda, they are going to be surprised. The European countries must wake up and understand once and for all how the strategy of tension works. And they must also learn to say “no” to the US. Moreover, in the US also, there are many people who do not want this militarizing of the international relationships.

Silvia Cattori: You have also done some research on the attacks that took place in September 11th 2001 and you have signed a book [13] jointly with other intellectuals who worry about the inconsistencies and contradictions of the official version of these events, as well as the conclusions of the commission of survey ordered by Mr. Bush. Do you not fear being accused of being a “conspiracy theorist”?

Daniele Ganser: My students and other people have always asked me : if this “war against terrorism” concerns indeed the oil and gas, the 911 attacks have also been manipulated, haven’t they? Or is it a coincidence that Osama Ben Laden’s Muslims have struck exactly at the precise moment that the occidental countries were starting to understand that an oil crisis was announcing itself?
Therefore, I became interested in what had been written about September 11th and I also studied the official report that was presented in 2004. When we dig into this subject, we realize from the start that there is a big worldwide debate around what really happened on 911. The information that we have is not very precise. What makes one question this 600 page report is that the third tower that collapsed on that day is not even mentioned. The commission only talks about the collapsing of two towers, the Twin Towers. But there is a third 170 meters high tower that collapsed too; the WTC 7 tower. A small fire is mentioned concerning it. I have talked to professors who know very well the building structures; they say that a small fire cannot destroy such a big structure. The official story of 911 and the commission’s conclusions, are not reliable. This lack of clarity puts the researchers in a difficult situation. The confusion predominated as well about what really happened at the Pentagon. In the pictures that we have, it is very difficult to see a plane. We cannot see how a plane would have fallen there.

Silvia Cattori: The Venezuelan Government has asked the US for further explanations to clarify the origin of the attacks. Would this not be the example to follow?

Daniele Ganser: There are many uncertainties about September 11th. Politicians, members of the academia and citizens can all claim to explain what really happened. I think that it is important to continue asking questions. It is an event that no one can forget; everybody remembers where he/she was at that precise moment. It is unbelievable that five years later, we still cannot see clearly what happened.

Silvia Cattori: It is almost as if none of the structures created wanted to doubt the official version. Is it possible that they let themselves be manipulated by the lack of information organized by the ones who organize the strategy of the tension and the False flags?

Daniele Ganser: We are prone to manipulation if we are afraid. Afraid of losing the respect from the people that we love. We cannot go out of this spiral of violence and terror if we let the fear take over. It is normal to be afraid, but we must overtly talk about this fear and about the manipulations that generate it. Nobody can escape their consequences. This is even more serious when the politicians in charge react often under the effect of fear. One must find the strength to say: “Yes, I am afraid to know that these lies make people suffer; yes, I am afraid to think that there is less oil left; yes, I am afraid to think that this terrorism they talk about is the consequence of manipulations, but I will not let myself become intimidated.”

Silvia Cattori: Up to what extent do countries like Switzerland participate, right now, in this strategy of tension?

Daniele Ganser: I do not think there is any strategy of tension in Switzerland. This country does not know any terrorist attacks. But, it is true that, in Switzerland as everywhere else, the politicians are afraid of the US and its strong position, and they have a tendency to say to themselves: “They are good friends, we’d better not fight against them.”

Silvia Cattori: Doesn’t this way of thinking and of covering up the lies that arise from the strategy of tension make everyone an accomplice of the crimes that it causes? To start with the journalists and the political parties?

Daniele Ganser: I personally think that everyone – journalists, professors, politicians – must think about the implications of the strategy if tension and the false flag. Here we are, indeed, in presence of phenomena that escape from every kind of agreement. That is why, every time that there are terrorist attacks, we must ask questions and try to understand what that implies. It is only on the day that we officially admit that the false flags are a reality, that it will be possible for us to create a list of the false flags that took place in history and to agree upon what should be done.
The subject that interests me is how to achieve peace. It is important to open a debate on the strategy of tension and to take cognizance of the fact that this is a very real phenomenon. Since as long as we do not recognize its existence, we cannot act. That is why it is important to explain what the strategy of tension truly means. And, once we have understood, we must not let fear and hatred against one group win. We must say to ourselves that it is not only one country that is involved in this; that it is not only the United States, Italy, Israel or the Iranians, but that it occurs everywhere. Even if certain countries participate in a more intensive way than others. We must understand, without blaming one country or one person. Fear and hatred do not help us to advance, they paralyse the debate. I see many accusations against the Unites States, against Israel and against great Britain, or alternatively against Iran and Syria. But the search for peace teaches us that one must not get lost in accusations based on nationalism, and that neither hatred nor fear are needed; that the most important thing is to explain the reality. And this comprehension will be beneficial for everybody.

Silvia Cattori: Why is your book about NATO’s secret armies published in English, translated into English, Turk, Slovenian and soon Greek, but it is not published in French?

Daniele Ganser: I haven’t found any publisher in France, yet. If any publisher happens to be interested in publishing my book, I will be very pleased to see it being issued in French.

 Silvia Cattori
Swiss journalist.
This author’s articles
To send a message


- Translation by Signs of the Times


[1] Nato’s secret Armies: Terrorism in Western Europe par Daniele Ganser, preface by John Prados. Frank Cass ed., 2005. ISBN 07146850032005

[2] It is after the attack in Piazza Fontana in Milano in 1969 that the term strategy of tension was heard for the first time.

[3] False flag operations is the expression used to talk about terrorist acts, conducted secretly by governments or organizations, and which are made to be seen as having been conducted by somebody else.

[4] « Stay-behind : les réseaux d’ingérence américains » (« the American interfering networks ») par Thierry Meyssan, Réseau Voltaire, August 20th, 2001.

[5] Stay behind is the name given to the clandestine structures trained to conduct a partisans’ war.

[6] Gladio designates the group of European secret armies that were under the guidance of the CIA.

[7] President of the Council of Ministers, member of the Christian Democracy.

[8] « Rapport Andreotti sur l’Opération Gladio » (“Andreotti Report about the Gladio Operation”) February 26th, 1991, Réseau Voltaire’s library.

[9] « 1980: Massacre in Bologna, 85 dead », Réseau Voltaire, July 6th, 2005.

[10] « La France autorise l’action des services US sur son territoire » (France authorises the US services to act on its territory ») by Thierry Meyssan, Réseau Voltaire, 8 mars 2004.

[11] LavonAffair, from the name of the Israeli minister of Defense who had to quit his work when Mossad was found to have been involved in these criminal acts.

[12] See : « Odeurs de pétrole à la Maison-Blanche » (Smell of oil in the White House), Réseau Voltaire, Dec. 14 , 2001. « Les ombres du rapport Cheney » (the shadows of the Cheney rapport) by Arthur Lepic, March 30, 2004. « The Power of Oil in the XXI Century » by Arthur Lepic, May 10th, 2004. « Dick Cheney, le pic pétrolier et le compte à rebours final » (Dick Cheney, the iol peak and the final downcount”) by Kjell Aleklett, March 9, 2005.« Adapting the economy to the lack of oil » by Thierry Meyssan, June 9th, 2005.

[13] 9/11 American Empire : Intellectual speaks out, under the direction of David Ray Griffin, Olive Branch Press, 2006

What Happened to ‘Kenny’s Sideshow?’ (Who is Next?)

Saturday, August 1, 2009

What Happened to ‘Kenny’s Sideshow?’

The excellent and very newsworthy blog, ‘Kenny’s Sideshow’ has been removed from the web.

Click on the blog this morning and this is what you’ll find: http://kennysideshow.blogspot.com/

Blog has been removed

Sorry, the blog at kennysideshow.blogspot.com has been removed. This address is not available for new blogs.

Did you expect to see your blog here? See: ‘I can’t find my blog on the Web, where is it?’

Yes, where is ‘Kenny’s Sideshow?’

Have the Zio-censors decided behind closed doors that Kenny’s was too informative, too timely and above all, actually made people think?

Shudder, we can’t have that, now can we?

Kenny’s Sideshow was an excellent source of worthy news and timely articles, along with brief, but very observant comments by the owner.

So what happened to ‘Kenny’s Sideshow?’

UPDATE

Here’s a message received from the author of ‘Kenny’s Sideshow’ this morning:

I didn’t really expect this. I did not violate any of the terms of service.

I’ve contacted google to see if I can get it back. We’ll see if they respond.

If not, I’ll leave a contact email address later.

Maybe someone has suggestions?

Kenny
kenny’s sideshow

What’s happened to ‘Kenny’s Sidesshow’ isn’t right. I urge all freedom loving people to contact Blogger and let them know that censorship shouldn’t exist in a free society and to return ‘Kenny’s Sideshow’ to the web.

After all, your blog could be next.

Posted by Greg Bacon at 3:11 AM

24 comments:

Anonymous said…
I didn’t really expect this. I did not violate any of the terms of service.

I’ve contacted google to see if I can get it back. We’ll see if they respond.

If not, I’ll leave a contact email address later.

Maybe someone has suggestions?

Kenny
kenny’s sideshow

August 1, 2009 3:57 AM
Greg Bacon said…
There are other, much more inflammatory blogs on the web, like Incogman that are still up, so whatever happend to yours is a mystery.

Others that are informative, yet funny, like Liberal White Boy, have a Google block on them, but you can access it by clicking on a link that says you’re OK with the contents of the blog.

What was done to yours is not right and smacks of censorship.

August 1, 2009 4:21 AM
Anonymous said…
You Paranoid Morons, you take yourself too serious, don’t you see you are a laugh I am amused to read how stupid infantile and low you OLD guys can get and how fucked up your minds can be.

August 1, 2009 4:32 AM
Saladin said…
I am also wondering why Kenny would be pulled but blogs like Incog Man, which is so blatantly obnoxious it’s suspect, remain. I think Kenny is too reasonable for his own good, if he were an in your face, ignorant racist he could rant to his hearts content, but thinking, rational people get the boot. I guess the “tribe” is getting paranoid eh? And they should be. They are making the same idiot moves they always have, that “fuck you slave” mentality that has gotten them kicked off of every country’s doorstep they ever darkened. You’re doing something right my friend, maybe try Word Press? I hope to see you back, I count on you for my daily fix! Don’t give up. Thanks for posting this Greg, I’m taking it to Myspace.

August 1, 2009 6:46 AM
Greg Bacon said…
Thanks for the help Saladin.

Yes, Incogman is so far out there it makes me wonder why it hasn’t gotten the boot.

Especially the comments, by people like ‘Nigger Head Smasher’ and ‘Kike Killer.’

They advocate alll sorts of violence, but the blog never gets tagged.

Makes one wonder.

August 1, 2009 6:57 AM
Broken said…
WordPress has their own inexplicable policies, and have shut down some blogs I felt deserved better. Aside from the Web 2.0 more-than-mere-blog sites, there exists a large number of free community services such as MyOpera. If I really had a problem with this, I’d pick some free site service, tolerate their junk ads, and simply hand-code a blog with static HTML. I also rent webspace pretty cheaply from a friend who leases the entire server. There are also free/cheap accounts scattered across the Net called Unix Shell Accounts. I can explain how to use them from a Windows box, and most allow you to run a website. What makes it work well is insuring friends link to your new digs.

In other words, it may take more work, but if you really feel it’s worth it, the options do exist. I’m not a webmaster by any means, but I can get things done, and share what I know. I’m not a faithful reader, but I do pass by this and Kenny’s blog from other places who find your stuff useful.

August 1, 2009 7:26 AM
Anonymous said…
You can be sure anything that is inflammatory,aimed at getting people riled up against each other(divide and conquer),will remain up.Anything that get’s at the truth and is informative has got to go!

August 1, 2009 8:14 AM
Anonymous said…
This is all about censorship. After all, censorship is becoming America’s favorite past-time. The US gov’t (and their corporate friends), already place protesters in fenced-in cages, ban books like America Deceived (book) from Wikipedia, Amazon and Facebook, and shut down Ron Paul. Free Speech forever, even for Kenny.

August 1, 2009 10:09 AM
Anonymous said…
WordPress Sucks.

August 1, 2009 10:40 AM
Anonymous said…
Just get your own domain name. For example, kennysideshow (dot) com appears to be available at this time. Then you can move your blog to another server any time you want without orphaning the links to it. The only thing that changes is the IP address, but the authoritative name server for your domain can be updated to point to the new IP.

August 1, 2009 10:58 AM
Anonymous said…
Thats what I was going to say. People have to stop using these mass-processed blog farms. Who do you think owns these sites? THE SAME PEOPLE WE’RE ALL COMPLAINING ABOUT.

Find a domain name and an affordable host and you’re off and going

August 1, 2009 11:38 AM
Visible said…
It’s just proof that you have been successful. This blog is an institution on the internet and a valuable source for information usually gone missing.

I expect to see you back shortly. You have my sympathies in your time of trail. They are after me all the time too but have not taken me down yet.

August 1, 2009 12:33 PM
Anonymous said…
Best thing to do is what others I know have started. Because of increased censorship on the web, people are starting up BBS’s again which can be easily accessed through a telnet client. Hell, dial-up BBS’s are resurging suprisingly

August 1, 2009 1:10 PM
Anonymous said…
A durable public presence on the Internet is possible if you understand a few technical details.

The Internet (notice the capital I) is a set of protocols which makes it possible for various private networks to interoperate transparently as one “virtual” network. This set of communally-developed protocols won out over various proprietary protocols precisely because it is open to all, and not proprietary. This makes the Internet our common heritage. It is the triumph of “software communalism” over “intellectual property”.

Part of this set is the Domain Name System, which is administered separate from any site on the Net which uses a name.
When someone accesses a site by name, his browser or other application first consults a name server to get its IP address. In a separate step, it then accesses that IP address to get the site’s service (web page, email, phone, etc.).

This decouples the name from the site. You can register a name for your exclusive use independent of any site which hosts your blog or other service. Blogspot.com (and implicitly any sebdomains such as kennysideshow.blogspot.com) is already registered by the owners of Blogger. If Kenny registers, say, kennysideshow.com for his exclusive use, and initially had pointed it to kennysideshow.blogger.com, then, when Blogger cut him off, he could simply upload his (hopefully locally saved) blog to another site and repoint his name to the new site’s name or IP.

August 1, 2009 2:53 PM
Anonymous said…
The day before kenny’s was removed, someone congratulated the blog on revealing the truth and then asked for contact so they could give the man behind the blog the money to continue. I thought this was suspect. I am upset about losing this blog. I hope the blog retained the email addresses for RSS feed: could pass on to another blog and kenny contribute and in the meantime start a website.

August 1, 2009 5:20 PM
GT said…
Two things are possible:

(1) go ‘freenet’ – the encrypted, distributed ‘alternative net’. This suffers from a lack of ‘audience’ currently, and a requirement for bandwidth contribution to make it work.

(2) set up a self-install of blog software on a privately hosted site: for example, with my hosting plan I have unlimited webspace and unlimited bandwidth – nothing prevents me from installing a thousand separate WordPress installations (one for each ‘rogue element’.

So if Kenny’s Sideshow wants to piuggy-back, he is more than welcome. I have been thinking of doing such a thing for some time, but it now seems that events are proceeding fast enough for action to be warranted.

I shifted my blog from Blogger (after 5 uneventful years) for two reasons – first, it became clear that a self-hosted WordPress installation gave me better tools, andsecond because it was becoming clear that Google was becoming evil.

See Burnin’ Down the House – in which I made clear that I was leaving because:

first, Blogger’s servers are somewhat kludgy and the Blogger editor is crap; second, Google (who own Blogger) is too ready to abrogate its “Do No Evil” motto in its bid to get money out of repressive governments (like ‘Israel’, the US and China); and third, self-hosted WordPress installations offer a much more robust mechanism for excluding unwanted visitors (e.g., French child-molesters who keep trying to hack this blog, but are easy to exclude from a hosted site).

AS someone who routinely calls for the killing of political parasites and their goon-drones (in posts on my own site and in comments all over the internets tubes), and as an avowed supporter of Jim Bell’s “Assassination Politics”, I had thought it sensible to move before Google turned its lidded gaze my way (in late 2008 I was the victim of an allegation of “holocaust denial” last time I was in France… as a result of a post on the Blogger blog. I spent two weeks in a French concentration camp and was the sent back to Australia – I am permitted to return).

Anyway… I hereby issue an open invite to any and all who want to participate in a set of blogs with a guarantee of zero censorship.

Cheerio

GT
GT’s Market Rant

August 1, 2009 5:27 PM
Anonymous said…
Don’t keep your eggs in one basket … such valuable information lost. Guys, you can shift from platform to platform but new thinking is needed. This is the French revolution again. Information needs to be made tangible. As a reader of your blogs I need the option to “download” your information. If Kenny’s Sideshow had some way of downloading his information I would have, and so would others. As of now, expecting more blogs to be removed I am manually downloading websites to ensure I have a copy of the information, it’s time consuming. Why do I not have “Kenny’s handbook”?

August 1, 2009 7:49 PM
denny cautrell said…
I am the one mentioned as potential donor to Kenny’s time and energy. I use my real name in my email. I guess I will forever be ‘considered’ suspect for offering to be a benefactor for someone that puts out the truth by those suspicious minds? Any one can contact me at the email I posted for further discussion. Being that Kenny’s is currently residing in censorship Hell: dennycautrell@fastmail.fm

I reside in Gainesville FL.

August 1, 2009 9:44 PM
Anonymous said…
The One World Government of the New World Orger will take down those who go over the line against them. Years ago, I remember viewing a site about Quayle and Bush that laid out some pretty heavy stuff with documentation and references; quickly my computer was shut down; went back on another computer later; the site was totally gone.

Looks like the One World Government of the New World Order will use the new mandatory Swine Flu vaccine as the next False Flag 911 attack on us to take away our civil liberties.

We need to have a debate in this country if we want to give up our Constitution and move into a One World Government that seeks to close down our churches and Temples.

This is really a spiritual battle; we must as individuals repent and turn away from satan’s ways in order for our prayers to be answered that Christ will preserve our freedoms. There is no other way.

August 1, 2009 10:27 PM
Anadæ Effro said…
Holy fookin’ shite! ~ (•:-0}

August 1, 2009 11:35 PM
Anonymous said…
To whoever posted this:

“You Paranoid Morons, you take yourself too serious, don’t you see you are a laugh I am amused to read how stupid infantile and low you OLD guys can get and how fucked up your minds can be.”

Congratulations, you are the perfect “modelled” citizen.

August 2, 2009 12:02 AM
Anonymous said…
Guess your brains are so fucked up you can not see the total picture.
Keep asking yourself questions, in a Paranoia mind, there are no answers to your questions.

So u are doomed, funny and keep on the amusment.

August 2, 2009 2:44 AM
Anonymous said…
Copy past articles that are really good into note or word pad or convert the page into pdf. I found some cool pictures and paintings at Kenny’s and some good articles from time to time. I knew something was up when it was as hard to find as the startpage search engine.

August 2, 2009 3:39 AM
Anonymous said…
Kenny received a request for his contact for donation, and next day blog down. It was from denny in this blog who responded with ‘suspicious minds.’ Denny, that’s what this is all about. There’s a Denny Cautrell who wrote a comment 2009 about his nephew just returned from 12 years military service in Iraq. http://cunninghamblog.gainesville.com/default.asp?item=2330402
same one?

August 2, 2009 4:36 AM

Post a Comment

The importance of East Turkistan

FIKRET ERTAN f.ertan@todayszaman.com Columnists

The importance of East Turkistan

Since the end of the Cold War and its aftermath, new strategically important regions have been emerging in the world.
Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) is one of them.
The struggle there will certainly have far-reaching consequences globally. Somalia, its environs and its waters is another example of these new strategic regions. The ongoing civil war and the resurgent piracy in its waters will have a global impact in one way or another.China’s Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, or East Turkistan, can also be designated as a new strategically important region. One look at the world map is enough to see this fact.

The region, which consists about one-sixth of the total area of China, borders on Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and both sides of the Indo-Pakistani Line of Control in Kashmir, as well as the Chinese Line of Control, claimed by India. The region also has borders with Russia and Mongolia in the north as well as the Tibet Autonomous Region in the south, which also has a long history of unrest and resistance to Chinese rule.

So, in terms of geopolitics, it is quite appropriate to say that the Uighur region is a gateway to Central Asia as well to the Indian sub-continent and that China is more than conscious of this fact. Its enormous natural resources are, of course, the second reason why China attributes so much importance to it.

In this regard, it is a well-known fact that the Uighur region holds enormous amounts of oil, natural gas, coal and many types of precious metals, including large deposits of uranium. According to Chinese sources the region has about 20 trillion cubic feet of proven gas reserves. The region represents one-seventh of China’s current oil production and nearly one-quarter of its oil reserves. It also holds over two-fifths of its coal reserves.

For these reasons China has been extracting oil, gas, coal and metals from the region and building roads and pipelines to transport them into China proper.

The West-East Gas Pipeline (WEGP) is the most important of them. Starting in East Turkestan’s Tarım Basin and running some 4,000 kilometers, it terminates in Shanghai. Its primary aim was to reduce China’s dependence on coal for electricity generation, particularly coal-generated residential electricity, by using gas.

The WEGP was opened in 2005 with a volume of 12 billion cubic meters per year, a figure projected to increase to 17 billion cubic meters per year. Construction of a second gas pipeline to run 9,000 kilometers (including its eight sub-lines and interconnections) from the northwest of the region began in early 2008. It will run parallel to the first WEGP and be interconnected with it up to Gansu before diverting to Guangzhou.

The volume of the second WEGP is planned to be 30 billion cubic meters per year and will be supplied largely by the Turkmenistan-China pipeline, which is now under construction across Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. In fact, recent news suggests that it has just reached the Chinese border. Furthermore, there are also plans to build a third and a fourth and possibly even a fifth WEGP across the region to support China’s growing gas demand.

In addition to these lines, China is also interested in the proposed IPI gas line, which will start in Iran, cross Pakistan and end in India. Iran and Pakistan agreed on the construction of the line two months ago; however, India has still not made up its mind. Seeing India’s indecision, China announced that it can take the place of India and could become the end country.

All in all, with these already active and planned lines and policies, China intends to exploit the natural wealth of the region to the fullest, whatever happens to the actual owners of the region, the Uighur Turks. That is why the region is so important to China.

Iran will build a wall topped with barbed wire along the border with Afghanistan

Iran will build a wall topped with barbed wire along the border with Afghanistan

31.07.2009 15:05 msk

Ferghana.Ru news agency

Iran.Ru reports that Tehran will build a wall on the border with Afghanistan to prevent drug trafficking.

A wall topped with barbed wire will be built along all 700 kilometers of the border. Tahi Taheri, Assistant Chief of the Iranian Drug Enforcement Agency, promises to have it constructed before the end of the Iranian year ending on March 20, 2010.

Taheri complained that the territory under poppy fields in Afghanistan had greatly expanded since the onset of NATO’s counter-terrorism operation in this country in 2001. “The impression is that the West supports production of drugs in Afghanistan instead of fighting it,” Taheri said.

Supplier of over 90% of the opium in the global market, Afghanistan poses a threat to all of the international community. Production of drugs in Afghanistan these days is 40 times what it was before occupation of the country by the US-led counter-terrorism coalition.

Congressman Wants More Behavioral Control

Brian Baird and the politics of behavioral change

Posted by Jeff Mapes, The Oregonian

As a once-practicing psychologist, you might say it’s hard-wired into Congressman Brian Baird to figure out how to get people to change their behavior for the better.

Rep. Brian Baird

As it turns out, that tendency led to quite a kerfuffle in the House this week as the Vancouver Democrat won committee passage of a bill authorizing the spending of $10 million a year to figure out how best to help and persuade people to reduce their energy use.Republicans charged that Baird was trying to move the government into what some called mind control. The story quickly jumped out of Capitol Hill and is now hitting the conservative blogosphere and talk-show circuit.

Just the other night, Fox News commentator Glenn Beck – no stranger to hyperbole – devoted a lengthy segment to Baird’s bill, warning: “They’re going to study us and find ways to essentially trick us into driving crappy hybrids, and I bet that’s just the beginning.”

Baird’s taking the hits with some humor – “The first thing we need to do is send aluminum hats to people to protect them from mind rays,” he told me Friday – but you can sense the frustration in his voice (hey, I can do my own psychoanalyzing).

In one sense, Baird’s legislation, H.R. 3247, is pretty unremarkable. It would establish a social and behavioral research program in the Department of Energy.

Businesses do this kind of research when they are trying to figure out how to make their products more user friendly, like when they’re designing the dashboard of a car. And so does the military when it’s trying to entice new recruits. You could even argue that abstinence-only sex education, a favorite of conservatives, is aimed at “tricking” teens into not having sex.

But the idea of behavioral research on energy seemed to get under the skin of many Republicans who have complained that the Democratic regime in Washington is inserting itself into too many areas of American life – whether it’s bailing out the auto companies or revamping the health-care system.

“At some point, controlling peoples’ behavior and social engineering becomes a threat to peoples’ freedom,” complained Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., during the debate over the bill Thursday before the House Committee on Science and Technology.

Baird, who has also applied his interest in behavioral science to such issues as health care, countered that he’s simply talking about using this research to communicate more effectively with consumers.

For example, he noted that utilities have found that people are much more likely to follow energy-savings tips if they are shown right on their bill how their consumption compares to homes of similar sizes.

“We don’t have to develop any of these new technologies” to produce immediate, major reductions in energy use, Baird said. “We just need to change our behavior. Depressingly, we don’t. We aren’t very smart about getting people to change their behavior.”

When I talked to Baird, he went on at length about how people don’t always make rational choices, and about how social research can help show how to nudge them in a certain direction.

In fact, “Nudge” is the title of a popular book on the subject co-written by Cass Sunstein, who is now a top White House aide in an administration that has shown quite a bit of interest in the subject. (One well-reported example from the book: Workers tend to set aside more in their 401(k) if they have to opt out of contributing instead of opting in.)

Still, Baird said, this kind of talk “feeds into the paranoia that is so prevalent right now.” His measure now heads to the full House and Baird said it is clear he has a floor fight on his hands.

Panetta’s Pathetic Attempt to Get Lawmakers to Ignore CIA Crimes

Panetta’s Pathetic Attempt to Get Lawmakers to Ignore CIA Crimes

By Melvin A. Goodman
The Public Record
Aug 1st, 2009

Leon-PanettaThe ideological partnership between the Washington Post and the Central Intelligence Agency is becoming despicable.  For the past several weeks, the Post has carried a series of editorial and op-eds that were designed to prevent the release of the Justice Department memoranda that permitted the use of CIA torture and abuse and to prevent any rigorous examination of these practices that went beyond the permitted guidelines.

Today’s Washington Post carries an op-ed by CIA Director Leon Panetta that accuses the congress of seeking “retribution” from CIA officials who were simply implementing “presidential decisions.”

Panetta’s views are similar to those of former director Richard Helms who, in defending the CIA’s role in overthrowing the elected government in Chile, said that “we are all honorable men.”  The following year, Helms was fined $2,000 and given a two-year suspended prison sentence for lying to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The Post and Panetta strongly believe that Washington is too “consumed with what the CIA did in the past” and that it is pointless to pursue “disputes over policies that no longer exist.”  However, these policies and the cover-up of these policies have compromised the objectivity and independence of the CIA.

Objective intelligence is needed to enable policymakers to challenge the polemicists and alarmists who exaggerate the threats to our national security.  One of the most damaging exaggerations was the Bush administration’s drum-beat of fear concerning Iraq’s fictional arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in the run-up to the Iraq War.

CIA director George Tenet was in a position to at least try to educate the Bush administration with the intelligence that refuted the lies concerning WMD.  Instead, Tenet said that it would be a “slam dunk” to provide the phony intelligence to make the case for war, and his deputy, John McLaughlin, actually delivered the “slam dunk” briefing in the White House in January 2003.

Unfortunately, President Obama has made the journey toward an investigation of torture and abuse more difficult by appointing Panetta as CIA director and John Brennan as deputy director of the National Security Council.  Brennan was a major player in the era of cover-up at the CIA, serving as Tenet’s executive assistant and playing a public role in selling renditions and secret prisons to the media, including the Washington Post.

Panetta, moreover, has retained the ideological drivers of these policies, including Steve Kappes, currently deputy director of the CIA, and Mike Sulick, chief of the National Clandestine Service.  Panetta takes credit in his op-ed for reporting a secret assassination program to the congress, but he has not addressed the fact that Kappes and Sulick kept the program secret from the director for more than four months. All four of these officials tried to stop President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder from releasing the torture memoranda.

Panetta has not named a new Inspector General for the CIA, although the former IG—John Helgerson—announced his retirement more than six months ago.  Instead, Panetta has relied on a weak acting IG who is not up to maintaining the independence of the office of the IG.

President Obama and Senate intelligence committee chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., should find it unacceptable that there is not a statutory IG in place at the CIA at this delicate juncture.  Helgerson’s departure was particularly untimely because he was responsible for the only authoritative study of CIA torture and abuse and detention policies that documented the abuse that started before the Justice Department sanctioned these measures and the torture that exceeded the permitted guidelines.

Panetta correctly argues that the CIA and the intelligence community are America’s first line of defense, but he fails to recognize that the abusive practices of the CIA have made it more difficult for foreign intelligence services to share vital information with their CIA counterparts.

CIA’s detention and interrogation programs were hidden from foreign intelligence services—and from our own congressional intelligence committees—and this has created suspicion and skepticism about CIA actions and assessments. This has complicated the task of maintaining credible relations with our allies in the battle against terrorism and with our congress in its important constitutional role of oversight.

Sadly, Panetta’s op-ed suggests that he is a follower of Stephen Decatur, the naval commander who won a major victory over the Barbary pirates in 1816 and celebrated with these words: “Our country!  In her intercourse with foreign nations, may she always be in the right; but our country, right or wrong.”  Panetta would serve the country better if he followed the words of Carl Schurz, a Major General in the Union Army who was elected to the Senate, where he proclaimed: “Our country, right or wrong.  When right, it ought to be kept right; when wrong, to be put right.”

Melvin A. Goodman, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and adjunct professor of government at Johns Hopkins University, is The Public Record’s National Security and Intelligence columnist. He spent 42 years with the CIA, the National War College, and the U.S. Army. His latest book is Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA.

Is the Left Promoting War on Iran?

Is the Left Promoting War on Iran?

By Bob Finch

Preamble

A number of commentators hold that the primary reason america will attack Iran is to defend the dollar as a global currency. Iran is alleged to be threatening the role of the dollar as the sole currency for oil transactions by setting up an oil bourse on which oil can be bought and sold for euros – just as Saddam threatened the dollar by selling Iraqi oil for euros. Paradoxically, most of those supporting such an hypothesis are anti-war commentators –both on the left and the (paleo) right wing.

The big political danger of the petro-dollar explanation of the war against Iran is that both left, and right, wing anti-war activists are in effect providing a justification for the war they are supposedly seeking to avert. Although the proponents of the petro-dollar hypothesis are anti-war, and personally do not regard the petro-dollar hypothesis as a justification for an american attack on Iran, it has to be suggested that for many Americans this hypothesis would provide sufficient justification for war. If Americans are told that Iran is devaluing the dollar in their pocket and threatening to bring about the collapse of the American economy they are going to want to know why America hasn’t started bombing iran. In their eyes, such a war would be self-defence, defending their way of life. There is a considerable danger that anti-war critics are going to find their explanation for the likelihood of an American attack on Iran is a self fulfilling prophesy which helps to win popular support for the war.

This article highlights the commentators promoting the petro-dollar hypothesis but does not seek to examine the merits of this hypothesis.

The Economic Origins of the Petro-Dollar/Oil Bourse Thesis

The idea that iran’s proposed oil bourse would pose a threat to the global supremacy of the dollar started primarily as an economic speculation.

(read here)

Iraqi Troops Blocked by Iranian Exiles

Iraqi Troops Blocked by Iranian Exiles

By CHARLES LEVINSON

CAMP ASHRAF, Iraq — Members of an Iranian dissidents’ group formed a human blockade to successfully prevent Iraqi troops from seizing more territory in their camp north of Baghdad, in the third day of a confrontation that showed no sign of ending soon.

Hundreds of Iraqi forces occupy just a sliver of territory within the sprawling camp, which is home to over 3,000 members of Mujahedin e-Khalq, or MEK. The Iraqi government said Wednesday it had asserted sovereignty over the entire camp following Tuesday’s raid.

But camp residents have blocked soldiers from patrolling beyond the land around an Iraqi police station established in an administrative building next to the camp’s water-treatment plant.

Associated PressMEK members face off with Iraqi security forces Tuesday, in an image provided by the Iranian dissident group.MEK members face off with Iraqi security forces Tuesday, in an image provided by the Iranian dissident group.

The government appears wary of trying to push deeper into the camp after the initial assault triggered deadly clashes. “If we try to leave this area without permission from the MEK they will block us, lie in front of our vehicles,” said Col. Saady Husseini, the commander of the police station.

MEK representatives say 12 people have been killed and about 500 were wounded. The Iraqi government has disputed those numbers. U.S. officials confirmed there have been deaths, but said they weren’t sure how many. Iraqi officers said 74 police and soldiers were wounded by MEK members.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki agreed on Thursday to let a small group of journalists into the camp. Visitors were given access to only the few hundred yards of land along the main road controlled by Iraqi forces.

MEK members lined up outside the Iraqi army’s cordon and held placards and shouted, “We are hostages,” pleading for the U.S. to take a stand.

U.S. military representatives declined to comment on Thursday’s events, as did the State Department. On Wednesday, State officials said they were unhappy with Iraq’s handling of the operation, but said it was a matter of Iraqi sovereignty.

The U.S. military had given the camp’s residents formal protection and many U.S. soldiers stationed here developed good relations with MEK members. In February, the U.S. handed control of the camp to Iraqi forces.

A U.S. Army captain got into a yelling match with an Iraqi officer at the camp’s gates after the officer banned journalists from speaking to members of the MEK and visiting the rest of the camp, including the hospital, where the group says hundreds of its members who were beaten by Iraqi forces are being treated.

When the Iraqi officer tried to approach him while he spoke with journalists, he held up his hands and yelled angrily at him to get away.

The group’s members have lived here since Saddam Hussein offered them refuge in 1986. Eucalyptus groves and grape arbors line paved, landscaped boulevards. MEK residents fear the Iraqi government’s close ties to Iran, which has long called on Iraq to dismantle the camp.

Col. Husseini described his attempts to negotiate peacefully with the group before resorting to force. “We assured them that we would not let anyone enter with links to Iran and they still refused.”

Write to Charles Levinson at charles.levinson@wsj.com


Gujarat riot victims hail High Court’s directive to interrogate Modi

Gujarat riot victims hail High Court’s directive to interrogate

Modi


Zakia Jaffrey wife of Ehsan Jaffery

Gujarat HC allows SIT to interrogate Modi in post-Godhra riots case: A Gujarat High Court on Friday dismissed the petition seeking a stay on investigating state Chief Minister Narendra Modi for his role in the 2002 Godhra…. Read Full

Surat: Families, which were victimised during the communal riots of 2002 in Gujarat, have expressed their happiness at the Gujarat High Court’s green signal to the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to interrogate state Chief Minister Narenda Modi for his role in the riots.

Zakia Jaffrey, whose husband Ehsan Jaffrey, ex-Congress MP was killed during the Gulburg society riots along with 39 others, hailed the decision.

“I am happy with the High Court decision. Now, the hidden facts will be known to the world. I am happy that the team will investigate Modi’s role,” said Jaffrey.

The court directive came in response to a petition filed by Zakia Jaffrey.

In her complaint Jaffrey alleged that Modi, his cabinet colleagues, police officials and senior bureaucrats aided and abetted the riots.

Meanwhile, the Congress Party welcomed the High Court’s decision and also shared Jaffrey’s views.

“I don’t want to make any comment on the decision since it is sub-judice. The Supreme Court is looking into it. I think it is the beginning of justice in Gujarat,” said Shaktisinh Gohil, Leader of Opposition.

The Supreme Court had earlier ordered the SIT to probe the complaint within three months and submit its report. Maliwad, who was acquitted, has said that the Supreme Court had directed the SIT to look into Jaffrey’s complaint.