"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")
What it means to be informed and possess an awareness of America’s downward spiral into a fascist state means two things: no longer is it taboo to compare Bush’s regime to Hitler’s, Stalin’s, or Mussolini’s, etc. and reasonable doubts whenever media reports of terrorist attacks such as the ones that just occurred in Pakistan will run wild in my brain until impeachment for treason of these war criminals running our nation takes place.
The recent blasts in Pakistan where a “suicide attack that killed up to 136 people and shattered former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto's joyous return from exile” which “bore the hallmarks of a warlord tied to al-Qaida and the Taliban” occurred requires us Americans to pull our resources and ask questions. It is in fact what I have done would like to get more Americans asking questions. Questioning our nation’s foreign policy and our nation’s domestic policy is the only sure way to combat intimidation and violence brought upon us Americans.
CIA Ties to Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence(ISI) Agency
Michael C. Ruppert, author of Crossing the Rubicon, wrote a chapter in Rubicon titled, “Setting Up the War: Pakistan’s ISI, America’s Agent for Protecting the Taliban and Al Qaeda.” An early paragraph reads:
“Since 9/11 there has been little denial in the mainstream press or elsewhere that Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) has been a close ally of the CIA. The use of Pakistan by the CIA in the 1980s to conduct a clandestine war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan is well documented. Pakistan’s leader at the time, Zia ul-Haq, intensified an already strong CIA-ISI relationship during covert operatins planned by Brzezinski and others, and then executed by CIA Director Bill Casey under Ronald Reagan. During the 1980s, the heroin trade in the region exploded, and Osama bin Laden, fighting alongside the likes of opium warlord and CIA protégé Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, got his first taste of guerrilla warfare and terrorist tactics in Afghan and Pakistani mountains. Those mountains became riddled with reinforced caves, in many cases built by the Binladin Group and paid for by the CIA.”
Following that, it is stated by Michel Chossudovsky that the “rise of the Taliban to assert control over fragmented tribal cultures in Afghanistan happened because the CIA and the ISI made it happen.” “The United States believed that in the Taliban it had found one group that could unify the country and provide a stable platform for the construction of [oil] pipelines.” This was, as respected French observer Oliver Roy noted “largely orchestrated by the Pakistani secret service [ISI] and the oil company Unocal, with its Saudi ally Delta.”
This says even more about America’s creation and support of the Taliban and adds on to the known fact that we armed the Taliban to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan in the early 1980s. That the Taliban is the CIA’s “creature” and that about one year after September 11th Cheney was telling us that our “intelligence asset” was out of our control should bother people. All should recognize that as Michel Chossudovsky points out in his article, “Political Deception: The Missing Link behind 9-11”, which was published on June 20, 2002, fear and disinformation was at the heart of any cries about Taliban and nobody should forget the simple reality that the CIA based on this information on ISI and the Taliban’s formation would be the first to know about any new terrorist attacks from al-Qaeda and are the ones who control “warnings” of “future terrorist attacks” on American soil.
But I didn’t begin this article with the plan to prove that 9/11 was an inside job. I want you to doubt that the attacks on Bhutto were in fact just a product of violent disagreements in Pakistan. Therefore, how was ISI connected to the recent blasts?
As the Times Online UK points out:
Asif Ali Zardari, Ms Bhutto’s husband, accused the intelligence services of involvement in the attempt on her life.
Under this scenario, Pakistani security forces – in particular the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence – would have had an interest in preventing Ms Bhutto’s return from exile.
They stand to lose power and influence if military rule ends and the country reverts to civilian authority.
There is no love lost between the Bhutto family and the military Establishment. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Ms Bhutto’s father, was overthrown in a military coup in 1977 and hanged in prison two years later by General Zia ul-Haq, the former military dictator.
Bingo, we’ve got a motive. And because the U.S. has allowed the ISI to prosper, flourish, and go about its business because it had an interest in sustaining ISI so that it could pursue oil in Central Asia. For example, check out this event which happened just months before the Sept 11th attacks (which can be found thanks to CooperativeResearch.org):
July 21, 2001: US Official Threatens Possible Military Action Against Taliban by October if Pipeline Is Not PursuedThree former American officials, Tom Simons (former US Ambassador to Pakistan), Karl Inderfurth (former Deputy Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs), and Lee Coldren (former State Department expert on South Asia) meet with Pakistani and Russian intelligence officers in a Berlin hotel. [Salon, 8/16/2002] This is the third of a series of back-channel conferences called “brainstorming on Afghanistan.” Taliban representatives sat in on previous meetings, but boycotted this one due to worsening tensions. However, the Pakistani ISI relays information from the meeting to the Taliban. [Guardian, 9/22/2001] At the meeting, Coldren passes on a message from Bush officials. He later says, “I think there was some discussion of the fact that the United States was so disgusted with the Taliban that they might be considering some military action.” [Guardian, 9/26/2001] Accounts vary, but former Pakistani Foreign Secretary Niaz Naik later says he is told by senior American officials at the meeting that military action to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan is planned to “take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.” The goal is to kill or capture both bin Laden and Taliban leader Mullah Omar, topple the Taliban regime, and install a transitional government of moderate Afghans in its place. Uzbekistan and Russia would also participate. Naik also says, “It was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taliban.” [BBC, 9/18/2001] One specific threat made at this meeting is that the Taliban can choose between “carpets of bombs” —an invasion—or “carpets of gold” —the pipeline. [Brisard and Dasquie, 2002, pp. 43] Naik contends that Tom Simons made the “carpets” statement. Simons claims, “It’s possible that a mischievous American participant, after several drinks, may have thought it smart to evoke gold carpets and carpet bombs. Even Americans can’t resist the temptation to be mischievous.” Naik and the other American participants deny that the pipeline was an issue at the meeting. [Salon, 8/16/2002]
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
