Subject: Fabricating an Enemy
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 02:43:23 -0500
From: Michel Chossudovsky
It is the Bush Administration, rather than Baghdad,
which is supporting Al Qaeda
FABRICATING AN ENEMY
by Michel Chossudovsky
www.globalresearch.ca , 28 January / janvier 2003
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO301B.html
* * *
Part II of a two part Series. Part I was entitled: War
Propaganda. See:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO301A.html
One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to
«fabricate an enemy» . As anti-war sentiment grows and
the political legitimacy the Bush Administration falters,
doubts regarding the existence of this "outside enemy"
must be dispelled.
As the date of the planned invasion of Iraq approaches, the
Bush Administration and its indefectible British ally have
multiplied the "warnings" of future Al Qaeda terrorist
attacks. The enemy has to appear genuine: thousands of
news stories and editorials linking Al Qaeda to the
Baghdad government are planted in the news chain. Colin
Powell underscored this relationship in his presentation to
the Davos World Economic Forum in January. Iraq is
casually presented in official statements and in the media
as "a haven for and supplier of the terror network":
"Evidence that is still tightly held is accumulating within
the administration that it is not a matter of chance that
terror groups in the al Qaeda universe have made their
weapons of choice the poisons, gases and chemical devices
that are signature arms of the Iraqi regime."1
In this context, propaganda purports to drown the truth,
and kill the evidence on how Osama bin Laden?s Al Qaeda
was fabricated and transformed into "Enemy Number
One".
Meanwhile, "anti-terrorist operations" directed against
Muslims, including arbitrary mass arrests have been
stepped up. In the US, emergency measures are
contemplated in the case of war. The corporate media is
busy preparing public opinion. A «national emergency» is
said to be justified because «America is under attack»:
« the U.S. and Western interests in the Western world
have to be prepared for retaliatory attacks from sleeper
cells the second we launch an attack in Iraq.» 2
Defence of the Homeland
Emergency procedures are already in place. The Secretary
of Homeland Defence -whose mandate is to «safeguard
the nation from terrorist attacks»-- has already been
granted the authority « to take control of a national
emergency», implying the establishment of de facto
military rule. In turn, the newly established Northern
Command would be put in charge of military operations in
the US «war on terrorism » theatre.
The Smallpox Vaccination Program
In the context of these emergency measures, preparations
for compulsory smallpox vaccination are already under
way in response to a presumed threat of a biological
weapons attack on US soil. The vaccination program
which has been the object of intense media propaganda--
would be launched with the sole purpose of creating an
atmosphere of panic among the population:
«A few infected individuals with a stack of plane
tickets--or bus tickets, for that matter--could spread
smallpox infection across the country, touching off a
plague of large proportions ?. It is not inconceivable that a
North Korea or an Iraq could retain smallpox in a hidden
lab and pass the deadly agent on to terrorists.»3
The hidden agenda is crystal clear. How best to discredit
the anti-war movement and maintain the legitimacy of
the State? Create conditions, which instill fear and hatred,
present the rulers as "guardians of the peace", committed
to weeding out terrorism and preserving democracy. In the
words of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, echoing
almost verbatim the US propaganda dispatches:
"?I believe it is inevitable that they will try in some form or
other,? ?I think we can see evidence from the recent arrests
that the terrorist network is here as it is around the rest of
Europe, around the rest of the world? The most frightening
thing about these people is the possible coming together of
fanaticism and the technology capable of delivering mass
destruction.?"4
Mass Arrests
The mass arrests of individuals of Middle Eastern origin
since September 11 2001 on trumped up charges is not
motivated by security considerations. Their main function
is to provide "credibility" to the fear and propaganda
campaign. Each arrest, amply publicised by the corporate
media, repeated day after day "gives a face" to this
invisible enemy. It also serves to drown the fact that Al
Qaeda is a creature of the CIA. "Enemy Number One" is
not an enemy but an instrument.)
In other words, the Propaganda campaign performs two
important functions.
First it must ensure that the enemy is considered a real
threat.
Second, it must distort the truth, --i.e. it must conceal
"the relationship" between this "fabricated enemy" and its
creators within the military-intelligence apparatus.
In other words, the nature and history of Osama bin
Laden?s Al Qaeda and the Islamic brigades since the
Soviet-Afghan war must be suppressed because if it
trickles down to the broader public, the legitimacy of the
so-called "war on terrorism" collapses like a deck of cards.
And in the process, the legitimacy of the main political and
military actors is threatened.
The "9/11 Foreknowledge" Scandal
On 16 May 2002, the New York tabloids revealed that
"President Bush had been warned of possible high jacking
before the terror attacks" and had failed to act.5
The disinformation campaign was visibly stalling in the
face of mounting evidence of CIA-Osama links. For the
first time since 9/11, the mainstream press had hinted to
the possibility of a cover-up at the highest echelons of the
US State apparatus.
FBI Agent Coleen Rowley, who blew the whistle on the
FBI, played a key role in unleashing the crisis. Her
controversial Memo to FBI Director Robert Mueller
pointed to the existence of "deliberate roadblocks" on the
investigation of the September 11 attacks:
"Minutes after the 9/11 attacks the SSA [David Frasca,
Director of the Radical Fundamentalist unit in the FBI]
said ?this was probably all just a coincidence? and we were
to do nothing until we got their permission, because we
might screw up something else going on elsewhere in the
country" 6
In response to an impending political crisis, the fear and
disinformation campaign went into overdrive. The news
chain was all of a sudden inundated with reports and
warnings of "future terrorist attacks". A carefully worded
statement (visibly intended to instill fear) by Vice
President Dick Cheney contributed to setting the stage:
"I think that the prospects of a future attack on the U.S.
are almost a certainty... It could happen tomorrow, it could
happen next week, it could happen next year, but they will
keep trying. And we have to be prepared."7
What Cheney is really telling us is that our "intelligence
asset", which we created, is going to strike again. Now, if
this "CIA creature" were planning new terrorist attacks,
you would expect that the CIA would be first to know
about it. In all likelihood, the CIA also controls the
so-called ?warnings' emanating from CIA sources on
"future terrorist attacks" in the US and around the World.
Propaganda?s Consistent Pattern
Upon careful examination of news reports on actual,
"possible" or "future" terrorist attacks, the propaganda
campaign exhibits a consistent pattern. Similar concepts
appear simultaneously in hundreds of media reports:
they refer to "reliable sources", a growing body of evidence
--e.g. government or intelligence or FBI.
They invariably indicate that the terrorist groups involved
have "ties to bin Laden" or Al Qaeda, or are "sympathetic
to bin Laden",
The reports often points to the possibility of terrorist
attacks, "sooner or later" or "in the next two months".
The reports often raise the issue of so-called "soft targets",
pointing to the likelihood of civilian casualties.
They indicate that future terrorist attacks could take place
in a number of allied countries (including Britain, France,
Germany) in which public opinion is strongly opposed to
the US-led war on terrorism.
They confirm the need by the US and its allies to initiate
"pre-emptive" actions directed against these various
terrorist organizations and/or the foreign governments
which harbour the terrorists.
They often point to the likelihood that these terrorist
groups possess WMD including biological and chemical
weapons (as well as nuclear weapons). The links to Iraq
and "rogue states" (discussed in Part I) is also mentioned.
The warnings also include warnings regarding "attacks on
US soil", attacks against civilians in Western cities.
They point to efforts undertaken by the police authorities
to apprehend the alleged terrorists.
The arrested individuals are in virtually all cases Muslims
and/or of Middle Eastern origin.
The reports are also used to justify the Homeland Security
legislation as well as the "ethnic profiling" and mass
arrests of presumed terrorists.
This pattern of disinformation in the Western media
applies the usual catch phrases and buzz words. (See press
excerpts below. The relevant catch phrases are indicated in
italics):
"Published reports, along with new information obtained
from U.S. intelligence and military sources, point to a
growing body of evidence that terrorists associated with
and/or sympathetic to Osama bin Laden are planning a
significant attack on U.S. soil.
Also targeted are allied countries that have joined the
worldwide hunt for the radical Muslim cells hell-bent on
unleashing new waves of terrorist strikes. ? The U.S.
government's activation of antiterrorist forces comes as the
FBI issued a warning Nov. 14 that a "spectacular" new
terrorist attack may be forthcoming - sooner rather than
later. ...
Elsewhere, the Australian government issued an
unprecedented warning to its citizens that al-Qaeda
terrorists there might launch attacks within the next two
months. 8
Although CIA Director George Tenet said in recent
congressional testimony that "an attempt to conduct
another attack on U.S. soil is certain," a trio of former
senior CIA officials doubted the chance of any
"spectacular" terror attacks on U.S. soil.9
"Germans have been skittish since the terrorist attacks in
the United States, fearing that their country is a ripe target
for terrorism. Several of the hijackers in the Sept. 11
attacks plotted their moves in Hamburg.10
"On Dec. 18, a senior government official, speaking on
condition of anonymity, briefed journalists about the ?high
probability? of a terrorist attack happening ?sooner or
later.? ? he named hotels and shopping centres as potential
?soft targets?? The official also specifically mentioned: a
possible chemical attack in the London subway, the
unleashing of smallpox, the poisoning of the water supply
and strikes against "postcard targets" such as Big Ben and
Canary Warf.
The "sooner or later" alert followed a Home Office
warning at the end of November that said Islamic radicals
might use dirty bombs or poison gas to inflict huge
casualties on British cities. This also made big headlines
but the warning was quickly retracted in fear that it would
cause public panic. 11
The message yesterday was that these terrorists, however
obscure, are trying - and, sooner or later, may break
through London's defences. It is a city where tens of
thousands of souls,? Experts have repeatedly said that the
UK, with its bullish support for the US and its war on
terror, is a genuine and realistic target for terror groups,
including the al- Qaeda network led by 11 September
mastermind Osama bin Laden.12
Quoting Margaret Thatcher: "Only America has the reach
and means to deal with Osama bin Laden or Saddam
Hussein or the other wicked psychopaths who will sooner
or later step into their shoes."13
According to a recent US State Department alert:
"Increased security at official US facilities has led
terrorists to seek softer targets such as residential areas,
clubs, restaurants, places of worship, hotels, schools,
outdoor recreation events, resorts, beaches and planes."14
Actual Terrorist Attacks
To be "effective" the fear and disinformation campaign
cannot solely rely on unsubstantiated "warnings" of future
attacks, it also requires "real" terrorist occurrences or
"incidents", which provide credibility to the
Administration?s war plans. Propaganda endorses the need
to implement "emergency measures" as well as implement
retaliatory military actions.
The triggering of "war pretext incidents" is part of the
Pentagon?s assumptions. In fact it is an integral part of US
military history.15 In fact in 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff
had envisaged a secret plan entitled "Operation
Northwoods, to deliberately trigger civilian casualties to
justify the invasion of Cuba:
"We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and
blame Cuba," "We could develop a Communist Cuban
terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities
and even in Washington" "casualty lists in U.S.
newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national
indignation." (See the declassified Top Secret 1962
document titled "Justification for U.S. Military
Intervention in Cuba"16 (See Operation Northwoods at
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NOR111A.html ).
There is no evidence that the Pentagon or the CIA played
a direct role in recent terrorist attacks. The latter were
undertaken by organisations (or cells of these
organisations), which operate quite independently, with a
certain degree of autonomy. This independence is in the
very nature of a covert intelligence operation. The
«intelligence asset» is not in direct contact with its covert
sponsors. It is not necessarily cognizant of the role it plays
on behalf of its intelligence sponsors.
The fundamental question is who is behind them? Through
what sources are they being financed? What is the
underlying network of ties?
A recent (2002) classified outbrief drafted to guide the
Pentagon «calls for the creation of a so-called « Proactive,
Pre-emptive Operations Group » (P2OG), to launch secret
operations aimed at "stimulating reactions" among
terrorists and states possessing weapons of mass
destruction -- that is, for instance, prodding terrorist cells
into action and exposing themselves to "quick-response"
attacks by U.S. forces.» 17
The P2OG initiative is nothing new. It essentially extends
an existing apparatus of covert operations. Amply
documented, the CIA has supported terrorist groups since
the Cold War era. This « prodding of terrorist cells » under
covert intelligence operations often requires the infiltration
and training of the radical groups linked to Al Qaeda.
Covert support by the US military and intelligence
apparatus has been channelled to various Islamic terrorist
organisations through a complex network of intermediaries
and intelligence proxies. Moreover, numerous official
statements, intelligence reports confirm recent links (in the
post Cold War era) between US military-intelligence units
and Al Qaeda operatives, as occurred in Bosnia (mid
1990s), Kosovo (1998-99) and Macedonia (2001).18 The
Republican Party Committee of the US Congress in a 1997
report points to open collaboration between the US
military and Al Qaeda operatives in the civil war in
Bosnia.19 (See US Congress, 16 January 1997,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/DCH109A.html )
Ties to Al Qaeda and Pakistan?s Military Intelligence
(ISI)
It is indeed revealing that in virtually all post 9/11 terrorist
occurrences, the terrorist organization is said to have "ties
to Osama bin Laden?s Al Qaeda". This in itself is a crucial
piece of information. Of course, the fact that Al Qaeda is a
creature of the CIA is neither mentioned in the press
reports nor is considered relevant.
The ties of these terrorist organizations (particularly those
in Asia) to Pakistan?s military intelligence (ISI) is
acknowledged in a few cases by official sources and press
dispatches. Confirmed by the Council on Foreign Relations
(CFR), some of these groups are said to have links to
Pakistan?s ISI, without identifying the nature of these
links. Needless to say, this information is crucial in
identifying the sponsors of these terrorist attacks. In other
words, the ISI is said to support these terrorist
organizations, while at same time maintaining close ties to
the CIA.
The Bali Bomb Attack (October 2002)
The Bali attack in the Kuta seaside resort resulted in close
to 200 deaths, mainly Australian tourists. The bomb attack
was allegedly perpetrated by Jemaah Islamiah, a group,
which operates in several countries in South East Asia.
Press reports and official statements point to close ties
between Jemaah Islamiah (JI) and Al Qaeda. The JI?s
"operational leader" is Riduan Isamuddin, alias Hambali, a
veteran of the Soviet-Afghan war, who was trained in
Afghanistan and Pakistan. According to a report by UPI:
"The [Soviet-Afghan] war provided opportunities for key
figures of these groups, who went to Afghanistan, to
experience firsthand the glory of jihad. Many of the
radicals detained in Singapore and Malaysia derived their
ideological inspiration from the activities of the
Mujahideen in Afghanistan and Pakistan" 20
What the report fails to mention is that the training of the
Mujahideen in Afghanistan and Pakistan was a CIA
sponsored initiative launched under President Jimmy
Carter in 1979, using Pakistan?s ISI as a go-between.
JI?s links to Indonesia?s Military Intelligence
There are indications, that in addition to its alleged links to
Al Qaeda, Jemaah Islamiah also has links to Indonesia?s
military intelligence, which in turn has links to the CIA
and Australian intelligence.
The links between JI and Indonesia?s Intelligence Agency
(BIN) are acknowledged by the International Crisis Group
(ICG):
"This link [of JI to the BIN] needs to be explored more
fully: it does not necessarily mean that military intelligence
was working with JI, but it does raise a question about the
extent to which it knew or could have found out more
about JI than it has acknowledged." 21 (International
Crisis Group,
http://www.crisisweb.org/projects/showreport.cfm?reportid=845
, 2003)
The ICG, however, fails to mention that Indonesia?s
intelligence apparatus has for more than 30 years been
controlled by the CIA.
In the wake of the October 2002 Bali bombing, a
contradictory report emanating from Indonesia?s top brass,
pointed to the involvement of both the head of Indonesian
intelligence General A. M. Hendropriyono as well as the
CIA:
"The agency and its director, Gen. A. M. Hendropriyono,
are well regarded by the United States and other
governments. But there are still senior intelligence officers
here who believe that the C.I.A. was behind the
bombing."22
In response to these statements, the Bush Administration
demanded that President Megawati Sukarnoputri, publicly
refute the involvement of the U.S in the attacks. No
official retraction was issued. Not only did President.
Megawati remained silent on this matter, she also accused
the US of being:
"a superpower that forced the rest of the world to go along
with it? We see how ambition to conquer other nations has
led to a situation where there is no more peace unless the
whole world is complying with the will of the one with the
power and strength." 23
Meanwhile, the Bush Administration, had used the Bali
attacks to prop up its fear campaign:
"President Bush said Monday that he assumes al-Qaeda
was responsible for the deadly bombing in Indonesia and
that he is worried about fresh attacks on the United
States." 24
The news [regarding the Bali attack] came as US
intelligence officials warned that more attacks like the
Indonesian bombing can be expected in the next few
months, in Europe, the Far East or the US."25
Cover-up
The links of JI to the Indonesian intelligence agency were
never raised in the official Indonesian government
investigation --which was guided behind the scenes by
Australian intelligence and the CIA.
Moreover, shortly after the bombing, Australian Prime
Minister John Howard "admitted that Australian
authorities were warned about possible attacks in Bali but
chose not to issue a warning."26 Also In the wake of the
bombings, the Australian government chose to work with
Indonesia?s Special Forces the Kopassus, in the so-called
"war on terrorism".
Australia: "Useful Wave of Indignation"
Reminiscent of Operation Northwoods, the Bali attack
served to trigger "a useful wave of indignation."27 They
contributed to swaying Australian public opinion in favour
of the US invasion of Iraq, while weakening the anti-war
protest movement. In the wake of the Bali attack, the
Australian government "officially" joined the US-led "war
on terrorism." It has not only used the Bali bombings as a
pretext to fully integrate the US-UK military axis, it has
also adopted drastic police measures including "ethnic
profiling" directed against its own citizens:
Prime Minister John Howard made the extraordinary
declaration recently that he is prepared to make
pre-emptive military strikes against terrorists in
neighbouring Asian countries planning to attack Australia.
Australian intelligence agencies also are very worried
about the likelihood of an al-Qaeda attack using nuclear
weapons.28
The Attacks on the Indian Parliament (December 2001)
The December 2001 terrorist attacks on the Indian
Parliament --which contributed to pushing India and
Pakistan to the brink of war-- were allegedly conducted
by two Pakistan-based rebel groups, Lashkar-e-Taiba
("Army of the Pure") and Jaish-e-Muhammad ("Army of
Mohammed"). The press reports acknowledged the ties of
both groups to Al Qaeda, without however mentioning
that they were directly supported by Pakistan=s ISI. The
Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) confirms in this
regard that:
"through its Interservices Intelligence agency (ISI),
Pakistan has provided funding, arms, training facilities,
and aid in crossing borders to Lashkar and Jaish?Many
were given ideological training in the same madrasas, or
Muslim seminaries, that taught the Taliban and foreign
fighters in Afghanistan. They received military training at
camps in Afghanistan or in villages in Pakistan-controlled
Kashmir. Extremist groups [supported by the ISI] have
recently opened several new madrasas in Azad
Kashmir."29 (Council on Foreign Relations at
http://www.terrorismanswers.com/groups/harakat2.html ,
Washington 2002)
What the CFR fails to mention is the crucial relationship
between the ISI and the CIA and the fact that the ISI
continues to support Lashkar, Jaish and the militant
Jammu and Kashmir Hizbul Mujahideen (JKHM), while
also collaborating with the CIA. Ironically, confirmed by
the writings of Zbigniew Brzezinski (who happens to be a
member of the CFR), the training of these "foreign
fighters" was an initiative of US foreign policy, launched
during the Carter Administration in 1979 at the outset of
the Soviet-Afghan war. Coinciding with the 1989 Geneva
Peace Agreement and the Soviet withdrawal from
Afghanistan, the ISI was instrumental in the creation of
the militant Jammu and Kashmir Hizbul Mujahideen
(JKHM).30 The timely attack on the Indian Parliament,
followed by the ethnic riots in Gujarat in early 2002, were
the culmination of a process initiated in the 1980s,
financed by drug money and abetted by Pakistan?s military
intelligence.
Dismantling the Propaganda Campaign, Building an
Anti-War Consensus
We are at the juncture of the most serious crisis in modern
history, requiring an unprecedented degree of solidarity,
courage and commitment. America's war, which includes
the "first strike" use of nuclear weapons, threatens the
future of humanity.
Much of the justification for waging this war without
borders rests on the legitimacy of the Bush
administration?s anti-terrorist programme. The latter
forms part of the propaganda campaign, which in turn is
used to sway the US population into an unconditional
acceptance of the war agenda.
In the US, and around the world, the anti-war movement
has gained in impetus. While millions of people have joined
hands in opposing the war, the Bush Administration's fear
and disinformation campaign, relayed by the corporate
media, has served to uphold the shaky legitimacy of the
Bush administration.
At this critical crossroads, the anti-war/pro-democracy
movement must necessarily move to a higher plane, which
addresses the main functions of the Administration's
propaganda machine. The main purpose of propaganda is
to sustain the legitimacy of the rulers and ensure that the
rulers remain in power.
Undermining the Bush Administration's « Right to Rule»
In other words, the mobilization of antiwar sentiment in
itself will not reverse the tide of war.
What is needed is to consistently challenge the legitimacy
of the main political and military actors, reveal the true
face of the American Empire and the underlying
criminalisation of foreign policy. Ultimately what is
required is to question and eventually undermine the Bush
Administration's «right to rule».
Revealing the lies behind the Bush Administration is the
basis for destroying the legitimacy of the main political and
military actors.
Even if a majority of the population is against the war, this
in itself will not prevent the war from occurring. The
propaganda campaign?s objective is to sustain the lies
which support the legitimacy of the main political and
military actors, including Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld,
Ashcroft, Tenet, Armitage, Rice, et al. As long as the Bush
Cabinet is considered a «legitimate government» in the
eyes of the people and World public opinion, it will carry
out the Iraqi invasion plan, whether it has public support
or not.
In other words, this legitimacy must be challenged.
Similarly in Britain, where a majority of the population is
against the US-led war, actions must be launched which
ultimately result in the downfall of the Blair Cabinet and
the withdrawal of Britain from the US-led military
coalition.
A necessary condition for bringing down the rulers is to
weaken and eventually dismantle their propaganda
campaign. How best to achieve this objective? By fully
uncovering the lies behind the « war on terrorism» and
revealing the complicity of the Bush administration in the
events of 9/11.
This is a big hoax, it?s the biggest lie in US history. The
war pretext does not stick and the rulers should be
removed.
Moreover, it is important to show that « Enemy Number
One » is fabricated. The terrorist attacks are indeed real,
but who is behind them? The covert operations in support
of terrorist organisations, including the history of Al
Qaeda?s links to the CIA since the Soviet Afghan war,
must be fully revealed because they relate directly to the
wave of terrorist attacks which have occurred since
September 11, all of which are said to have links to Al
Qaeda.
To reverse the tide, the spreading of information at all
levels, which counteracts the propaganda campaign is
required.
The truth undermines and overshadows the lie.
And the truth is that the Bush administration is in fact
supporting international terrorism as a pretext to wage
war on Iraq.
Once this truth becomes fully understood, the legitimacy of
the rulers will collapse like a deck of cards. This is what
has to be achieved. But we can only achieve it, by
effectively counteracting the official propaganda campaign.
The momentum and success of the large anti-war rallies
in the US, the European Union and around the world,
should lay the foundations of a permanent network
composed of tens of thousands of local level anti-war
committees in neighbourhoods, work places, parishes,
schools, universities, etc. It is ultimately through this
network that the legitimacy of those who "rule in our
name will be challenged.
To shunt the Bush Administration's war plans and disable
its propaganda machine, we must, in the months ahead
reach out to our fellow citizens across the land, in the US,
Canada and around the world, to the millions of ordinary
people who have been misled on the causes and
consequences of this war, not to mention the implications
of the Bush Administration's Homeland Security
legislation, which essentially sets in place the building
blocks of a police state.
This initiative requires the spreading of information in an
extensive grassroots network, with a view to weakening
and ultimately disabling the Bush Administration?s
propaganda machine.
When the lies including those concerning September 11
are fully revealed and understood by everybody, the
legitimacy of the Bush Administration will be broken Big
Brother will have no leg to stand on, that is, no more wars
to feed on. While this will not necessarily result in a
fundamental and significant "regime change" in the US, a
new "anti-war consensus" will have emerged, which will
eventually pave the way for a broader struggle against the
New World Order and the American Empire's quest for
global domination.
_______________
NOTES
1. Washington Post, 25 January 2003.
2. Ibid
3 Chicago Sun, 31 December 2002.
4 Reuters, 21 February 2003
5. See Ian Woods, Conspiracy of Silence, McKinney
Vindicated, Global Outlook, No. 2, 2002.
6. Coleen Rowley, Memo To FBI Director Robert Mueller,
quoted in Global Outlook, No. 3, 2003, p. 28.
7. The Boston Globe, 5 June 2002.
8. Insight on the News, 3 February 2003.
9. UPI, 19 December 2002.
10. New York Times, 6 January 2003.
11. Toronto Star, 5 January 2003.
12. The Scotsman, 8 January 2003.
13. UPI, 10 December 2002.
14. AFP, 3 January 2003.
15. See Richard Sanders, War Pretext Incidents, How to
Start a War, Global Outlook, published in two parts, Issues
2 and 3, 2002-2003.
16.Operation Northwoods, declassified top secret document
sent by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to Secretary of Defence
Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NOR111A.html .
17. William Arkin, The Secret War, The Los Angeles
Times, 27 October 2002.
18. See Michel Chossudovsky, War and Globalisation, The
Truth behind September 11, Global Outlook, 2003, Chapter
3, http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html
19. See Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help
Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base, Congressional
Press Release, US Congress, 16 January 1997,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/DCH109A.html
20. UPI, 6 January 2002.
21. International Crisis Group, Indonesia Backgrounder:
How The Jemaah Islamiyah Terrorist Network Operates,
http://www.crisisweb.org/projects/showreport.cfm?reportid=845
, 2003
22, Raymond Bonner and Jane Perlez, More Attacks on
Westerners Are Expected in Indonesia, New York Times,
25 November 2002
23. Quoted in Raymond Bonner and Jane Perlez, op cit.
24. USA Today, 15 October 2002.
25. Business AM, 15 October 2002.
26. Christchurch Press, 22 November 2002), (Similar
warnings were made by the CIA).
27. Operation Northwoods, op cit.
28. Insight on the News, 3 February 2003.
29. Council on Foreign Relations at:
http://www.terrorismanswers.com/groups/harakat2.html ,
Washington 2002.
30. See K. Subrahmanyam, Pakistan is Pursuing Asian
Goals, India Abroad, 3 November 1995.
-------------------------
ANNEX
Supporting evidence that successive US administrations
have supported Al Qaeda is summarized below (references
are provided to a selected bibliography):
The "Islamic Brigades" are a creation of US foreign policy.
In the post-Cold War era, the CIA continues to support
and use Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda in its covert
operations. In standard CIA jargon, Al Qaeda is
categorized as an "intelligence asset".
The U.S. Congress has documented in detail, the links of
Al Qaeda to agencies of the U.S. government during the
civil war in Bosnia-Herzegovina, as well as in Kosovo and
Macedonia.
The evidence confirms that Al Qaeda is supported by
Pakistan's military intelligence, the Inter-services
Intelligence (ISI). Amply documented, the ISI, allegedly
played an undercover role in financing the 9/11 attacks.
The ISI has a close working relationship with the CIA.
Pakistan?s ISI has consistently supported various Islamic
terrorist organizations, while also collaborating with the
CIA.
These various terrorist groups supported by Pakistan?s ISI
operate with some degree of autonomy in relation to their
covert sponsors, but ultimately they act in the way which
serves US interests.
The CIA keeps track of its "intelligence assets". Amply
documented, Osama bin Laden's whereabouts are known.
Al Qaeda is infiltrated by the CIA. In other words, there
were no "intelligence failures"! The 9-11 terrorists did not
act on their own volition. The suicide hijackers were
instruments in a carefully planned intelligence operation.
For further details consult: Centre for Research on
Globalization, 9/11 Reader, which constitutes and
extensive bibliography at
http://globalresearch.ca//by-topic/sept11/
See also Michel Chossudovsky, War and Globalisation,
The Truth behind September 11, Global Outlook, 2002
http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html
Centre for Research on Globalization, Foreknowledge of
9/11 A Compilation of CRG articles and documents in
support of a 9-11 Investigation,
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CRG204A.html
---
Michel Chossudovsky is author of War and Globalisation,
the Truth behind September 11, for details see
http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html
Copyright Michel Chossudovsky, CRG 2002. All rights
reserved. Permission is granted to post this text on
non-commercial community internet sites, provided the
source and the URL are indicated, the essay remains intact
and the copyright note is displayed. To publish this text in
printed and/or other forms, including commercial internet
sites and excerpts, contact the CRG at
editor@...
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 02:43:23 -0500
From: Michel Chossudovsky
It is the Bush Administration, rather than Baghdad,
which is supporting Al Qaeda
FABRICATING AN ENEMY
by Michel Chossudovsky
www.globalresearch.ca , 28 January / janvier 2003
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO301B.html
* * *
Part II of a two part Series. Part I was entitled: War
Propaganda. See:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO301A.html
One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to
«fabricate an enemy» . As anti-war sentiment grows and
the political legitimacy the Bush Administration falters,
doubts regarding the existence of this "outside enemy"
must be dispelled.
As the date of the planned invasion of Iraq approaches, the
Bush Administration and its indefectible British ally have
multiplied the "warnings" of future Al Qaeda terrorist
attacks. The enemy has to appear genuine: thousands of
news stories and editorials linking Al Qaeda to the
Baghdad government are planted in the news chain. Colin
Powell underscored this relationship in his presentation to
the Davos World Economic Forum in January. Iraq is
casually presented in official statements and in the media
as "a haven for and supplier of the terror network":
"Evidence that is still tightly held is accumulating within
the administration that it is not a matter of chance that
terror groups in the al Qaeda universe have made their
weapons of choice the poisons, gases and chemical devices
that are signature arms of the Iraqi regime."1
In this context, propaganda purports to drown the truth,
and kill the evidence on how Osama bin Laden?s Al Qaeda
was fabricated and transformed into "Enemy Number
One".
Meanwhile, "anti-terrorist operations" directed against
Muslims, including arbitrary mass arrests have been
stepped up. In the US, emergency measures are
contemplated in the case of war. The corporate media is
busy preparing public opinion. A «national emergency» is
said to be justified because «America is under attack»:
« the U.S. and Western interests in the Western world
have to be prepared for retaliatory attacks from sleeper
cells the second we launch an attack in Iraq.» 2
Defence of the Homeland
Emergency procedures are already in place. The Secretary
of Homeland Defence -whose mandate is to «safeguard
the nation from terrorist attacks»-- has already been
granted the authority « to take control of a national
emergency», implying the establishment of de facto
military rule. In turn, the newly established Northern
Command would be put in charge of military operations in
the US «war on terrorism » theatre.
The Smallpox Vaccination Program
In the context of these emergency measures, preparations
for compulsory smallpox vaccination are already under
way in response to a presumed threat of a biological
weapons attack on US soil. The vaccination program
which has been the object of intense media propaganda--
would be launched with the sole purpose of creating an
atmosphere of panic among the population:
«A few infected individuals with a stack of plane
tickets--or bus tickets, for that matter--could spread
smallpox infection across the country, touching off a
plague of large proportions ?. It is not inconceivable that a
North Korea or an Iraq could retain smallpox in a hidden
lab and pass the deadly agent on to terrorists.»3
The hidden agenda is crystal clear. How best to discredit
the anti-war movement and maintain the legitimacy of
the State? Create conditions, which instill fear and hatred,
present the rulers as "guardians of the peace", committed
to weeding out terrorism and preserving democracy. In the
words of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, echoing
almost verbatim the US propaganda dispatches:
"?I believe it is inevitable that they will try in some form or
other,? ?I think we can see evidence from the recent arrests
that the terrorist network is here as it is around the rest of
Europe, around the rest of the world? The most frightening
thing about these people is the possible coming together of
fanaticism and the technology capable of delivering mass
destruction.?"4
Mass Arrests
The mass arrests of individuals of Middle Eastern origin
since September 11 2001 on trumped up charges is not
motivated by security considerations. Their main function
is to provide "credibility" to the fear and propaganda
campaign. Each arrest, amply publicised by the corporate
media, repeated day after day "gives a face" to this
invisible enemy. It also serves to drown the fact that Al
Qaeda is a creature of the CIA. "Enemy Number One" is
not an enemy but an instrument.)
In other words, the Propaganda campaign performs two
important functions.
First it must ensure that the enemy is considered a real
threat.
Second, it must distort the truth, --i.e. it must conceal
"the relationship" between this "fabricated enemy" and its
creators within the military-intelligence apparatus.
In other words, the nature and history of Osama bin
Laden?s Al Qaeda and the Islamic brigades since the
Soviet-Afghan war must be suppressed because if it
trickles down to the broader public, the legitimacy of the
so-called "war on terrorism" collapses like a deck of cards.
And in the process, the legitimacy of the main political and
military actors is threatened.
The "9/11 Foreknowledge" Scandal
On 16 May 2002, the New York tabloids revealed that
"President Bush had been warned of possible high jacking
before the terror attacks" and had failed to act.5
The disinformation campaign was visibly stalling in the
face of mounting evidence of CIA-Osama links. For the
first time since 9/11, the mainstream press had hinted to
the possibility of a cover-up at the highest echelons of the
US State apparatus.
FBI Agent Coleen Rowley, who blew the whistle on the
FBI, played a key role in unleashing the crisis. Her
controversial Memo to FBI Director Robert Mueller
pointed to the existence of "deliberate roadblocks" on the
investigation of the September 11 attacks:
"Minutes after the 9/11 attacks the SSA [David Frasca,
Director of the Radical Fundamentalist unit in the FBI]
said ?this was probably all just a coincidence? and we were
to do nothing until we got their permission, because we
might screw up something else going on elsewhere in the
country" 6
In response to an impending political crisis, the fear and
disinformation campaign went into overdrive. The news
chain was all of a sudden inundated with reports and
warnings of "future terrorist attacks". A carefully worded
statement (visibly intended to instill fear) by Vice
President Dick Cheney contributed to setting the stage:
"I think that the prospects of a future attack on the U.S.
are almost a certainty... It could happen tomorrow, it could
happen next week, it could happen next year, but they will
keep trying. And we have to be prepared."7
What Cheney is really telling us is that our "intelligence
asset", which we created, is going to strike again. Now, if
this "CIA creature" were planning new terrorist attacks,
you would expect that the CIA would be first to know
about it. In all likelihood, the CIA also controls the
so-called ?warnings' emanating from CIA sources on
"future terrorist attacks" in the US and around the World.
Propaganda?s Consistent Pattern
Upon careful examination of news reports on actual,
"possible" or "future" terrorist attacks, the propaganda
campaign exhibits a consistent pattern. Similar concepts
appear simultaneously in hundreds of media reports:
they refer to "reliable sources", a growing body of evidence
--e.g. government or intelligence or FBI.
They invariably indicate that the terrorist groups involved
have "ties to bin Laden" or Al Qaeda, or are "sympathetic
to bin Laden",
The reports often points to the possibility of terrorist
attacks, "sooner or later" or "in the next two months".
The reports often raise the issue of so-called "soft targets",
pointing to the likelihood of civilian casualties.
They indicate that future terrorist attacks could take place
in a number of allied countries (including Britain, France,
Germany) in which public opinion is strongly opposed to
the US-led war on terrorism.
They confirm the need by the US and its allies to initiate
"pre-emptive" actions directed against these various
terrorist organizations and/or the foreign governments
which harbour the terrorists.
They often point to the likelihood that these terrorist
groups possess WMD including biological and chemical
weapons (as well as nuclear weapons). The links to Iraq
and "rogue states" (discussed in Part I) is also mentioned.
The warnings also include warnings regarding "attacks on
US soil", attacks against civilians in Western cities.
They point to efforts undertaken by the police authorities
to apprehend the alleged terrorists.
The arrested individuals are in virtually all cases Muslims
and/or of Middle Eastern origin.
The reports are also used to justify the Homeland Security
legislation as well as the "ethnic profiling" and mass
arrests of presumed terrorists.
This pattern of disinformation in the Western media
applies the usual catch phrases and buzz words. (See press
excerpts below. The relevant catch phrases are indicated in
italics):
"Published reports, along with new information obtained
from U.S. intelligence and military sources, point to a
growing body of evidence that terrorists associated with
and/or sympathetic to Osama bin Laden are planning a
significant attack on U.S. soil.
Also targeted are allied countries that have joined the
worldwide hunt for the radical Muslim cells hell-bent on
unleashing new waves of terrorist strikes. ? The U.S.
government's activation of antiterrorist forces comes as the
FBI issued a warning Nov. 14 that a "spectacular" new
terrorist attack may be forthcoming - sooner rather than
later. ...
Elsewhere, the Australian government issued an
unprecedented warning to its citizens that al-Qaeda
terrorists there might launch attacks within the next two
months. 8
Although CIA Director George Tenet said in recent
congressional testimony that "an attempt to conduct
another attack on U.S. soil is certain," a trio of former
senior CIA officials doubted the chance of any
"spectacular" terror attacks on U.S. soil.9
"Germans have been skittish since the terrorist attacks in
the United States, fearing that their country is a ripe target
for terrorism. Several of the hijackers in the Sept. 11
attacks plotted their moves in Hamburg.10
"On Dec. 18, a senior government official, speaking on
condition of anonymity, briefed journalists about the ?high
probability? of a terrorist attack happening ?sooner or
later.? ? he named hotels and shopping centres as potential
?soft targets?? The official also specifically mentioned: a
possible chemical attack in the London subway, the
unleashing of smallpox, the poisoning of the water supply
and strikes against "postcard targets" such as Big Ben and
Canary Warf.
The "sooner or later" alert followed a Home Office
warning at the end of November that said Islamic radicals
might use dirty bombs or poison gas to inflict huge
casualties on British cities. This also made big headlines
but the warning was quickly retracted in fear that it would
cause public panic. 11
The message yesterday was that these terrorists, however
obscure, are trying - and, sooner or later, may break
through London's defences. It is a city where tens of
thousands of souls,? Experts have repeatedly said that the
UK, with its bullish support for the US and its war on
terror, is a genuine and realistic target for terror groups,
including the al- Qaeda network led by 11 September
mastermind Osama bin Laden.12
Quoting Margaret Thatcher: "Only America has the reach
and means to deal with Osama bin Laden or Saddam
Hussein or the other wicked psychopaths who will sooner
or later step into their shoes."13
According to a recent US State Department alert:
"Increased security at official US facilities has led
terrorists to seek softer targets such as residential areas,
clubs, restaurants, places of worship, hotels, schools,
outdoor recreation events, resorts, beaches and planes."14
Actual Terrorist Attacks
To be "effective" the fear and disinformation campaign
cannot solely rely on unsubstantiated "warnings" of future
attacks, it also requires "real" terrorist occurrences or
"incidents", which provide credibility to the
Administration?s war plans. Propaganda endorses the need
to implement "emergency measures" as well as implement
retaliatory military actions.
The triggering of "war pretext incidents" is part of the
Pentagon?s assumptions. In fact it is an integral part of US
military history.15 In fact in 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff
had envisaged a secret plan entitled "Operation
Northwoods, to deliberately trigger civilian casualties to
justify the invasion of Cuba:
"We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and
blame Cuba," "We could develop a Communist Cuban
terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities
and even in Washington" "casualty lists in U.S.
newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national
indignation." (See the declassified Top Secret 1962
document titled "Justification for U.S. Military
Intervention in Cuba"16 (See Operation Northwoods at
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NOR111A.html ).
There is no evidence that the Pentagon or the CIA played
a direct role in recent terrorist attacks. The latter were
undertaken by organisations (or cells of these
organisations), which operate quite independently, with a
certain degree of autonomy. This independence is in the
very nature of a covert intelligence operation. The
«intelligence asset» is not in direct contact with its covert
sponsors. It is not necessarily cognizant of the role it plays
on behalf of its intelligence sponsors.
The fundamental question is who is behind them? Through
what sources are they being financed? What is the
underlying network of ties?
A recent (2002) classified outbrief drafted to guide the
Pentagon «calls for the creation of a so-called « Proactive,
Pre-emptive Operations Group » (P2OG), to launch secret
operations aimed at "stimulating reactions" among
terrorists and states possessing weapons of mass
destruction -- that is, for instance, prodding terrorist cells
into action and exposing themselves to "quick-response"
attacks by U.S. forces.» 17
The P2OG initiative is nothing new. It essentially extends
an existing apparatus of covert operations. Amply
documented, the CIA has supported terrorist groups since
the Cold War era. This « prodding of terrorist cells » under
covert intelligence operations often requires the infiltration
and training of the radical groups linked to Al Qaeda.
Covert support by the US military and intelligence
apparatus has been channelled to various Islamic terrorist
organisations through a complex network of intermediaries
and intelligence proxies. Moreover, numerous official
statements, intelligence reports confirm recent links (in the
post Cold War era) between US military-intelligence units
and Al Qaeda operatives, as occurred in Bosnia (mid
1990s), Kosovo (1998-99) and Macedonia (2001).18 The
Republican Party Committee of the US Congress in a 1997
report points to open collaboration between the US
military and Al Qaeda operatives in the civil war in
Bosnia.19 (See US Congress, 16 January 1997,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/DCH109A.html )
Ties to Al Qaeda and Pakistan?s Military Intelligence
(ISI)
It is indeed revealing that in virtually all post 9/11 terrorist
occurrences, the terrorist organization is said to have "ties
to Osama bin Laden?s Al Qaeda". This in itself is a crucial
piece of information. Of course, the fact that Al Qaeda is a
creature of the CIA is neither mentioned in the press
reports nor is considered relevant.
The ties of these terrorist organizations (particularly those
in Asia) to Pakistan?s military intelligence (ISI) is
acknowledged in a few cases by official sources and press
dispatches. Confirmed by the Council on Foreign Relations
(CFR), some of these groups are said to have links to
Pakistan?s ISI, without identifying the nature of these
links. Needless to say, this information is crucial in
identifying the sponsors of these terrorist attacks. In other
words, the ISI is said to support these terrorist
organizations, while at same time maintaining close ties to
the CIA.
The Bali Bomb Attack (October 2002)
The Bali attack in the Kuta seaside resort resulted in close
to 200 deaths, mainly Australian tourists. The bomb attack
was allegedly perpetrated by Jemaah Islamiah, a group,
which operates in several countries in South East Asia.
Press reports and official statements point to close ties
between Jemaah Islamiah (JI) and Al Qaeda. The JI?s
"operational leader" is Riduan Isamuddin, alias Hambali, a
veteran of the Soviet-Afghan war, who was trained in
Afghanistan and Pakistan. According to a report by UPI:
"The [Soviet-Afghan] war provided opportunities for key
figures of these groups, who went to Afghanistan, to
experience firsthand the glory of jihad. Many of the
radicals detained in Singapore and Malaysia derived their
ideological inspiration from the activities of the
Mujahideen in Afghanistan and Pakistan" 20
What the report fails to mention is that the training of the
Mujahideen in Afghanistan and Pakistan was a CIA
sponsored initiative launched under President Jimmy
Carter in 1979, using Pakistan?s ISI as a go-between.
JI?s links to Indonesia?s Military Intelligence
There are indications, that in addition to its alleged links to
Al Qaeda, Jemaah Islamiah also has links to Indonesia?s
military intelligence, which in turn has links to the CIA
and Australian intelligence.
The links between JI and Indonesia?s Intelligence Agency
(BIN) are acknowledged by the International Crisis Group
(ICG):
"This link [of JI to the BIN] needs to be explored more
fully: it does not necessarily mean that military intelligence
was working with JI, but it does raise a question about the
extent to which it knew or could have found out more
about JI than it has acknowledged." 21 (International
Crisis Group,
http://www.crisisweb.org/projects/showreport.cfm?reportid=845
, 2003)
The ICG, however, fails to mention that Indonesia?s
intelligence apparatus has for more than 30 years been
controlled by the CIA.
In the wake of the October 2002 Bali bombing, a
contradictory report emanating from Indonesia?s top brass,
pointed to the involvement of both the head of Indonesian
intelligence General A. M. Hendropriyono as well as the
CIA:
"The agency and its director, Gen. A. M. Hendropriyono,
are well regarded by the United States and other
governments. But there are still senior intelligence officers
here who believe that the C.I.A. was behind the
bombing."22
In response to these statements, the Bush Administration
demanded that President Megawati Sukarnoputri, publicly
refute the involvement of the U.S in the attacks. No
official retraction was issued. Not only did President.
Megawati remained silent on this matter, she also accused
the US of being:
"a superpower that forced the rest of the world to go along
with it? We see how ambition to conquer other nations has
led to a situation where there is no more peace unless the
whole world is complying with the will of the one with the
power and strength." 23
Meanwhile, the Bush Administration, had used the Bali
attacks to prop up its fear campaign:
"President Bush said Monday that he assumes al-Qaeda
was responsible for the deadly bombing in Indonesia and
that he is worried about fresh attacks on the United
States." 24
The news [regarding the Bali attack] came as US
intelligence officials warned that more attacks like the
Indonesian bombing can be expected in the next few
months, in Europe, the Far East or the US."25
Cover-up
The links of JI to the Indonesian intelligence agency were
never raised in the official Indonesian government
investigation --which was guided behind the scenes by
Australian intelligence and the CIA.
Moreover, shortly after the bombing, Australian Prime
Minister John Howard "admitted that Australian
authorities were warned about possible attacks in Bali but
chose not to issue a warning."26 Also In the wake of the
bombings, the Australian government chose to work with
Indonesia?s Special Forces the Kopassus, in the so-called
"war on terrorism".
Australia: "Useful Wave of Indignation"
Reminiscent of Operation Northwoods, the Bali attack
served to trigger "a useful wave of indignation."27 They
contributed to swaying Australian public opinion in favour
of the US invasion of Iraq, while weakening the anti-war
protest movement. In the wake of the Bali attack, the
Australian government "officially" joined the US-led "war
on terrorism." It has not only used the Bali bombings as a
pretext to fully integrate the US-UK military axis, it has
also adopted drastic police measures including "ethnic
profiling" directed against its own citizens:
Prime Minister John Howard made the extraordinary
declaration recently that he is prepared to make
pre-emptive military strikes against terrorists in
neighbouring Asian countries planning to attack Australia.
Australian intelligence agencies also are very worried
about the likelihood of an al-Qaeda attack using nuclear
weapons.28
The Attacks on the Indian Parliament (December 2001)
The December 2001 terrorist attacks on the Indian
Parliament --which contributed to pushing India and
Pakistan to the brink of war-- were allegedly conducted
by two Pakistan-based rebel groups, Lashkar-e-Taiba
("Army of the Pure") and Jaish-e-Muhammad ("Army of
Mohammed"). The press reports acknowledged the ties of
both groups to Al Qaeda, without however mentioning
that they were directly supported by Pakistan=s ISI. The
Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) confirms in this
regard that:
"through its Interservices Intelligence agency (ISI),
Pakistan has provided funding, arms, training facilities,
and aid in crossing borders to Lashkar and Jaish?Many
were given ideological training in the same madrasas, or
Muslim seminaries, that taught the Taliban and foreign
fighters in Afghanistan. They received military training at
camps in Afghanistan or in villages in Pakistan-controlled
Kashmir. Extremist groups [supported by the ISI] have
recently opened several new madrasas in Azad
Kashmir."29 (Council on Foreign Relations at
http://www.terrorismanswers.com/groups/harakat2.html ,
Washington 2002)
What the CFR fails to mention is the crucial relationship
between the ISI and the CIA and the fact that the ISI
continues to support Lashkar, Jaish and the militant
Jammu and Kashmir Hizbul Mujahideen (JKHM), while
also collaborating with the CIA. Ironically, confirmed by
the writings of Zbigniew Brzezinski (who happens to be a
member of the CFR), the training of these "foreign
fighters" was an initiative of US foreign policy, launched
during the Carter Administration in 1979 at the outset of
the Soviet-Afghan war. Coinciding with the 1989 Geneva
Peace Agreement and the Soviet withdrawal from
Afghanistan, the ISI was instrumental in the creation of
the militant Jammu and Kashmir Hizbul Mujahideen
(JKHM).30 The timely attack on the Indian Parliament,
followed by the ethnic riots in Gujarat in early 2002, were
the culmination of a process initiated in the 1980s,
financed by drug money and abetted by Pakistan?s military
intelligence.
Dismantling the Propaganda Campaign, Building an
Anti-War Consensus
We are at the juncture of the most serious crisis in modern
history, requiring an unprecedented degree of solidarity,
courage and commitment. America's war, which includes
the "first strike" use of nuclear weapons, threatens the
future of humanity.
Much of the justification for waging this war without
borders rests on the legitimacy of the Bush
administration?s anti-terrorist programme. The latter
forms part of the propaganda campaign, which in turn is
used to sway the US population into an unconditional
acceptance of the war agenda.
In the US, and around the world, the anti-war movement
has gained in impetus. While millions of people have joined
hands in opposing the war, the Bush Administration's fear
and disinformation campaign, relayed by the corporate
media, has served to uphold the shaky legitimacy of the
Bush administration.
At this critical crossroads, the anti-war/pro-democracy
movement must necessarily move to a higher plane, which
addresses the main functions of the Administration's
propaganda machine. The main purpose of propaganda is
to sustain the legitimacy of the rulers and ensure that the
rulers remain in power.
Undermining the Bush Administration's « Right to Rule»
In other words, the mobilization of antiwar sentiment in
itself will not reverse the tide of war.
What is needed is to consistently challenge the legitimacy
of the main political and military actors, reveal the true
face of the American Empire and the underlying
criminalisation of foreign policy. Ultimately what is
required is to question and eventually undermine the Bush
Administration's «right to rule».
Revealing the lies behind the Bush Administration is the
basis for destroying the legitimacy of the main political and
military actors.
Even if a majority of the population is against the war, this
in itself will not prevent the war from occurring. The
propaganda campaign?s objective is to sustain the lies
which support the legitimacy of the main political and
military actors, including Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld,
Ashcroft, Tenet, Armitage, Rice, et al. As long as the Bush
Cabinet is considered a «legitimate government» in the
eyes of the people and World public opinion, it will carry
out the Iraqi invasion plan, whether it has public support
or not.
In other words, this legitimacy must be challenged.
Similarly in Britain, where a majority of the population is
against the US-led war, actions must be launched which
ultimately result in the downfall of the Blair Cabinet and
the withdrawal of Britain from the US-led military
coalition.
A necessary condition for bringing down the rulers is to
weaken and eventually dismantle their propaganda
campaign. How best to achieve this objective? By fully
uncovering the lies behind the « war on terrorism» and
revealing the complicity of the Bush administration in the
events of 9/11.
This is a big hoax, it?s the biggest lie in US history. The
war pretext does not stick and the rulers should be
removed.
Moreover, it is important to show that « Enemy Number
One » is fabricated. The terrorist attacks are indeed real,
but who is behind them? The covert operations in support
of terrorist organisations, including the history of Al
Qaeda?s links to the CIA since the Soviet Afghan war,
must be fully revealed because they relate directly to the
wave of terrorist attacks which have occurred since
September 11, all of which are said to have links to Al
Qaeda.
To reverse the tide, the spreading of information at all
levels, which counteracts the propaganda campaign is
required.
The truth undermines and overshadows the lie.
And the truth is that the Bush administration is in fact
supporting international terrorism as a pretext to wage
war on Iraq.
Once this truth becomes fully understood, the legitimacy of
the rulers will collapse like a deck of cards. This is what
has to be achieved. But we can only achieve it, by
effectively counteracting the official propaganda campaign.
The momentum and success of the large anti-war rallies
in the US, the European Union and around the world,
should lay the foundations of a permanent network
composed of tens of thousands of local level anti-war
committees in neighbourhoods, work places, parishes,
schools, universities, etc. It is ultimately through this
network that the legitimacy of those who "rule in our
name will be challenged.
To shunt the Bush Administration's war plans and disable
its propaganda machine, we must, in the months ahead
reach out to our fellow citizens across the land, in the US,
Canada and around the world, to the millions of ordinary
people who have been misled on the causes and
consequences of this war, not to mention the implications
of the Bush Administration's Homeland Security
legislation, which essentially sets in place the building
blocks of a police state.
This initiative requires the spreading of information in an
extensive grassroots network, with a view to weakening
and ultimately disabling the Bush Administration?s
propaganda machine.
When the lies including those concerning September 11
are fully revealed and understood by everybody, the
legitimacy of the Bush Administration will be broken Big
Brother will have no leg to stand on, that is, no more wars
to feed on. While this will not necessarily result in a
fundamental and significant "regime change" in the US, a
new "anti-war consensus" will have emerged, which will
eventually pave the way for a broader struggle against the
New World Order and the American Empire's quest for
global domination.
_______________
NOTES
1. Washington Post, 25 January 2003.
2. Ibid
3 Chicago Sun, 31 December 2002.
4 Reuters, 21 February 2003
5. See Ian Woods, Conspiracy of Silence, McKinney
Vindicated, Global Outlook, No. 2, 2002.
6. Coleen Rowley, Memo To FBI Director Robert Mueller,
quoted in Global Outlook, No. 3, 2003, p. 28.
7. The Boston Globe, 5 June 2002.
8. Insight on the News, 3 February 2003.
9. UPI, 19 December 2002.
10. New York Times, 6 January 2003.
11. Toronto Star, 5 January 2003.
12. The Scotsman, 8 January 2003.
13. UPI, 10 December 2002.
14. AFP, 3 January 2003.
15. See Richard Sanders, War Pretext Incidents, How to
Start a War, Global Outlook, published in two parts, Issues
2 and 3, 2002-2003.
16.Operation Northwoods, declassified top secret document
sent by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to Secretary of Defence
Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NOR111A.html .
17. William Arkin, The Secret War, The Los Angeles
Times, 27 October 2002.
18. See Michel Chossudovsky, War and Globalisation, The
Truth behind September 11, Global Outlook, 2003, Chapter
3, http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html
19. See Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help
Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base, Congressional
Press Release, US Congress, 16 January 1997,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/DCH109A.html
20. UPI, 6 January 2002.
21. International Crisis Group, Indonesia Backgrounder:
How The Jemaah Islamiyah Terrorist Network Operates,
http://www.crisisweb.org/projects/showreport.cfm?reportid=845
, 2003
22, Raymond Bonner and Jane Perlez, More Attacks on
Westerners Are Expected in Indonesia, New York Times,
25 November 2002
23. Quoted in Raymond Bonner and Jane Perlez, op cit.
24. USA Today, 15 October 2002.
25. Business AM, 15 October 2002.
26. Christchurch Press, 22 November 2002), (Similar
warnings were made by the CIA).
27. Operation Northwoods, op cit.
28. Insight on the News, 3 February 2003.
29. Council on Foreign Relations at:
http://www.terrorismanswers.com/groups/harakat2.html ,
Washington 2002.
30. See K. Subrahmanyam, Pakistan is Pursuing Asian
Goals, India Abroad, 3 November 1995.
-------------------------
ANNEX
Supporting evidence that successive US administrations
have supported Al Qaeda is summarized below (references
are provided to a selected bibliography):
The "Islamic Brigades" are a creation of US foreign policy.
In the post-Cold War era, the CIA continues to support
and use Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda in its covert
operations. In standard CIA jargon, Al Qaeda is
categorized as an "intelligence asset".
The U.S. Congress has documented in detail, the links of
Al Qaeda to agencies of the U.S. government during the
civil war in Bosnia-Herzegovina, as well as in Kosovo and
Macedonia.
The evidence confirms that Al Qaeda is supported by
Pakistan's military intelligence, the Inter-services
Intelligence (ISI). Amply documented, the ISI, allegedly
played an undercover role in financing the 9/11 attacks.
The ISI has a close working relationship with the CIA.
Pakistan?s ISI has consistently supported various Islamic
terrorist organizations, while also collaborating with the
CIA.
These various terrorist groups supported by Pakistan?s ISI
operate with some degree of autonomy in relation to their
covert sponsors, but ultimately they act in the way which
serves US interests.
The CIA keeps track of its "intelligence assets". Amply
documented, Osama bin Laden's whereabouts are known.
Al Qaeda is infiltrated by the CIA. In other words, there
were no "intelligence failures"! The 9-11 terrorists did not
act on their own volition. The suicide hijackers were
instruments in a carefully planned intelligence operation.
For further details consult: Centre for Research on
Globalization, 9/11 Reader, which constitutes and
extensive bibliography at
http://globalresearch.ca//by-topic/sept11/
See also Michel Chossudovsky, War and Globalisation,
The Truth behind September 11, Global Outlook, 2002
http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html
Centre for Research on Globalization, Foreknowledge of
9/11 A Compilation of CRG articles and documents in
support of a 9-11 Investigation,
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CRG204A.html
---
Michel Chossudovsky is author of War and Globalisation,
the Truth behind September 11, for details see
http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html
Copyright Michel Chossudovsky, CRG 2002. All rights
reserved. Permission is granted to post this text on
non-commercial community internet sites, provided the
source and the URL are indicated, the essay remains intact
and the copyright note is displayed. To publish this text in
printed and/or other forms, including commercial internet
sites and excerpts, contact the CRG at
editor@...