Archive | November 15th, 2010

WILL OBAMA JOIN LEAR IN THE STORM & RAGE AGAINST ISRAELI INSOLENCE?

NOVANEWS

November 15, 2010

by Debbie Menon  

Two lines in the fourth stanza of The Star Spangled Banner provide a clue to one American mindset that supports empire building.

By James M. Wall

“Then conquer we must, our cause it is just, And this be our motto, “In God is our trust.”

Francis Scott Key included an important caveat in that couplet when he wrote, “when our cause it is just”.  He did not write, “for our cause it is just”.

Wise leaders know the importance of the “justice” caveat when faced with the temptation to conquer others.

Unwise leaders create bogus causes to attack others. Three bogus causes that unwise leaders use to justify the urge to “conquer we must” are security of the homeland, fear, and xenophobia.

Director-writer M. Night Shyamalan’s 2004 film, The Village, is a seductive cinematic portrayal of  how leaders exercise control by creating fear of others. Shyamalan’s narrative is set in an isolated area where the village elders instill fear in the young, warning them of the dangerous creatures that lurk in the surrounding forest.

The danger in the forest does not actually exist.  But the fear is real, as the photo from The Village, above, illustrates.

The US-Israel project of conquer and control in the Middle East now beats the war drums against Iran, using the same threat of non-existent nuclear danger that took us into a disastrous war in Iraq.

Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu told the American Jewish Federation annual gathering in New Orleans last week:

If the international community, led by the United States, hopes to stop Iran’s nuclear program without resorting to military action, it will have to convince Iran that it is prepared to take such action.

The leader of a foreign nation speaks on American soil, to an American audience, and instructs the president of the United States to threaten war against Iran.

Israel’s open insolence against the US president could not have reached its current stage without the not-so-secret Fifth Column allies Israel has among White House staffers, the Congress, and the media.

(Fifth Column: Emilio Mola Vidal, a Nationalist general during the Spanish Civil War (1936-39), originally coined the term. As four of his army columns moved on Madrid, the general referred to his militant supporters within the capital as his “fifth column,” intent on undermining the loyalist government from within.)

Like the adult children who turn against King Lear after he relinquishes his crown, Bibi Netanyahu attacks the US president, the leader of the nation which has given so much of its treasure and its reputation to allow Israel to expand its own branch of the US-Israel empire.

In Shakespeare’s rendering of the story, King Lear rages at his ungrateful, power-mad adult children (with the exception of one daughter who truly does love him). Lear races out into the storm, accompanied only by his Fool, who mocks him for his weakness.

(Artist William Dyce (1806-1864) captures that scene in his painting, King Lear and the Fool in the Storm, a section of which is shown here).

Power has shifted, between the US and Israel, from King to children, from Patron to Surrogate.

Confronted by the insolence of her Israeli Surrogate, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sputtered that settlement building is “unhelpful” to the “Peace Process”. Then the Secretary huddled for seven hours with Netanyahu on Thursday and begged for a 90 day extension on settlement construction.

Out of that meeting came a package of “incentives” to the government of Israel, details of which emerged from Fifth Columnists, as reported by the Foreign Policy blog, The Cable:

In a Friday morning conference call with Jewish community leaders, notes of which were provided to The Cable, the National Security Council’s Dan Shapiro described several of the incentives Clinton offered Netanyahu.

They included increased U.S. diplomatic opposition to efforts to delegitimize Israel in international fora, continuing to block efforts to revive the Goldstone Report at the United Nations, promising to block condemnation of Israel at the United Nations for its raid on the Gaza-bound Mavi Marmara, and defeating resolutions aimed to expose Israel’s nuclear program at the IAEA, and increasing pressure on Iran and Syria to stop their nuclear and proliferation activities.

Do we hear a US government attack on American religious leaders for advocating boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel? We must assume the Secretary of State knows that to Israel BDS is a major tool in the “demonization” process.

Before Secretary Clinton huddled with Bibi, US Vice-President Joe Biden repeated his intimate “no light between the US and Israel” rhetoric he used last March when his “no light” mantra was greeted in Jerusalem by an announcement of yet more settlement construction in Occupied East Jerusalem.

Eight months later, speaking at the opening of the American Jewish Federation, November 7, the Vice President once again assured his listeners that there is “no light between us” .

How grateful was Bibi to the Vice President for his “no light” assurances? He promptly announced more new Israeli settlements, this time in the West Bank.

Unlike the US media, which sees nothing unseemly about this kabuki dance the Biden-Clinton team performs, the Israeli media is not so compliant.  An editorial in Ha’aretz reacts to Netanyahu’s deliberate slap at Biden:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s trip to the United States this week damaged Israel diplomatically, undermined the country’s relations with the U.S. administration and showed Netanyahu up again as a rejectionist who does nothing but look for excuses and delays to avoid making decisions.

When our vice-president is deliberately insulted by the Israeli prime minister, the American government and the American people are also insulted. Also insulted, though they don’t seem to care, are all those American Mainline Christians who insist on promoting interfaith relations rather than demanding that Israel honor the rights of Palestinians.

Do Obama, Biden and Clinton really believe that Israel’s conquering of the Palestinian land and its people is a just cause?  If they do, exactly what God is it that they trust to tell them that occupation and oppression are just?

During the Christmas season, which begins soon, some of those same ”interfaith relations” Christians may travel to Tel Avi  and get on an Israeli tourist bus to visit Bethlehem. As they travel, their bus ushered through myriad checkpoints, they will hear from their Israeli guides that the gigantic wall around the city of Bethlehem is solely for Israel’s security. Most of them will believe it.

On their way into Bethlehem those tourist Christians should look to the east of Bethlehem and see the foundations being laid for additional apartments, rising as part of the further expansion of the massive Jewish settlement of Har Homa.

Har Homa is a new Hebrew name, of course, for the mountain previouslu called Abu Ghenim (in Arabic, “the father of Ghenim”). The settlement is build on land that once belonged to Palestinian families who lived in the surrounding cities of Beit Sahour and Bethlehem, and the villages of Sur Baher and Um Tuba.

Through the windows of their tourist bus this Christmas, Christian visitors headed to Bethlehem will be able to see what all their interfaith promotion has helped produce, Jewish-only apartments built on the Shepherds’ Fields of Beit Sahour, where angels first proclaimed the birth of  the Christ child.

Will Joe Biden reflect on his “no light between us” promise when he attends a Christmas Eve service?  Will Hillary Clinton find her way to a United Methodist Church on that same night and wonder if perhaps she should have used a stronger term than “unhelpful” to describe the further enslavement of the Palestinian population?

If they sing, “O Little Town of Bethlehem”, will they think of the shepherds’ field that is no more?

Will President Obama pause this Christmas season to recall the US Civil Rights movement that finally broke the segregation control the American white majority held over its African-American population?

Perhaps the president will recall the words and music of a song from that 1960s American movement that changed the land the President now governs?

The video below uses footage from the current Palestinian resistance. The footage runs under “It Isn’t Nice“,  a US Civil Rights song from the 1960s, written by Malvina Reynolds, and sung in the video by Barbara Dane. The lyrics of “It Isn’t Nice”, are below the video.

The video was produced by Sana Kassem of Goldstone Facts, a website created to study the Goldstone Report. Barbara Dane, the singer, sent the following email to the video’s producer:

“At the end of this video please give credit to the writer of the words, who was a beloved singer/activist here in the SF Bay Area: Malvina Reynolds. Malvina was inspired to write the song in 1964 after taking part in a sit-in at the Palace Hotel in San Francisco, which was refusing to hire black people.”


YouTube – Veterans Today –

“It Isn’t Nice”, lyrics by Malvina Reynolds, copyright, 1964

It isn’t nice to block the doorway, It isn’t nice to go to jail, There are nicer ways to do it, But the nice ways always fail.

 It isn’t nice, it isn’t nice, You told us once, you told us twice, But if that is Freedom’s price, We don’t mind.

It isn’t nice to carry banners Or to sit in on the floor, Or to shout our cry of Freedom At the hotel and the store. It isn’t nice, it isn’t nice, You told us once, you told us twice, But if that is Freedom’s price,We don’t mind.

We have tried negotiations And the three-man picket line, Mr. Charlie didn’t see us.  And he might as well be blind. Now our new ways aren’t nice.  When we deal with men of ice, But if that is Freedom’s price, We don’t mind.

How about those years of lynchings And the shot in Evers’ back? Did you say it wasn’t proper, Did you stand upon the track?You were quiet just like mice, Now you say we aren’t nice, And if that is Freedom’s price, We don’t mind.

 It isn’t nice to block the doorway, It isn’t nice to go to jail, There are nicer ways to do it But the nice ways always fail. It isn’t nice, it isn’t nice, But thanks for your advice,  Cause if that is Freedom’s price, We don’t mind.

Two members of the cast from the film, The Village, are Adrien Brody (left) and Judy Greer (right), shown above.

James M. Wall is currently a Contributing Editor of The Christian Century magazine, based in Chicago, Illinois.  From 1972 through 1999, he was editor and publisher of the Christian Century magazine.  He has made more than 20 trips to that region as a journalist, during which he covered such events as Anwar Sadat’s 1977 trip to Jerusalem, and the 2006 Palestinian legislative election.

He has interviewed, and written about, journalists, religious leaders, political leaders and private citizens in the region.  Jim served for two years on active duty in the US Air Force, and three additional years in the USAF (inactive) reserve. Jim launched his new personal blog Wallwritings, on April 24, 2008. He can be reached at: 

jameswall8@gmail.com

More from James Wall

Fox News, Fear Peddlers and Falsehoods Reshape Congress

Posted in USAComments Off on WILL OBAMA JOIN LEAR IN THE STORM & RAGE AGAINST ISRAELI INSOLENCE?

MICHAEL HUGHES: US KASHMIR POLICY AIDS TALIBAN

NOVANEWS

November 15, 2010

by Gordon Duff

Kashmir

US SILENCE ON KASHMIR EMBOLDENS INDIAN NATIONALISTS, EMPOWERS TALIBAN

By Michael Hughes

As ghastly as it was for an Indian diplomat to lexically collate the words Tibet and Kashmir within the same sentence, even more surprising was the discovery of said parallelization’s source, which was none other than the typically more deliberate and diplomatically adroit Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna, who issued a motion today to Chinese foreign dignitaries that could easily be construed as meaning, “if you close your eyes to India’s alleged human rights abuses in Kashmir, we shall do the same with respect to China’s in Tibet.”

Of course one would hope Krishna had perhaps been misquoted during a 70-minute bilateral conversation that took place between Krishna and Chinese diplomats on the margins of the Russia-India-China trilateral discussions. Yet, Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao seemed fairly clear in relaying Krishna’s sentiments, according to The Hindu’s online newspaper:

“In that context,” said Ms. Rao, “[the External Affairs Minister] spoke of Jammu and Kashmir and expressed the hope that China would be sensitive to J&K just as we have been to the Tibet Autonomous Region and Taiwan.”

One wonders if New Delhi was able to procure President Barack Obama’s silence on the Kashmir issue during his recent trip to Bharat, in which multiple billions of dollars worth of business deals were announced that would lead to the creation of 45,000 U.S. jobs, successfully attempting indirect bribery as opposed to the more extortive measures insinuated with Beijing.

Because at one point Kashmir did seem like an important issue to Obama, as Indian author and human rights activist Arundhati Roy wrote recently in the New York Times, pointing out how a week before he was elected in 2008, Obama said that solving the dispute over Kashmir’s struggle for self-determination would be among his “critical tasks.” However, his remarks were greeted with consternation in India, and he has said almost nothing about Kashmir since then and future decisions will likely be driven by less-than-altruistic motives, per Roy:

Whether Mr. Obama decides to change his position on Kashmir again depends on several factors: how the war in Afghanistan is going, how much help the United States needs from Pakistan and whether the government of India goes aircraft shopping this winter. (An order for 10 Boeing C-17 Globemaster III aircraft, worth $5.8 billion, among other huge business deals in the pipeline, may ensure the president’s silence.) But neither Mr. Obama’s silence nor his intervention is likely to make the people in Kashmir drop the stones in their hands.

Unfortunately, the implications of America’s “see no evil” approach are written on the cave walls in the AfPak border region, and are apparent in the lack of enthusiasm Pakistan’s military leaders have exhibited in rooting out Taliban and affiliated militants holed up in North Waziristan safe havens. Hence, the cost of such silence far outweighs the economic and political value of the aforementioned business deals, as Pakistan’s reluctance strengthens the Taliban and Haqqani Network who are able to maintain their sanctuaries, the very existence of which have rendered General David Petraeus’s counterinsurgency efforts futile.

Ahmed Rashid stressed in Foreign Policy Magazine last week that the road to Kabul runs through Kashmir, and America’s biggest mistake is its failure to recognize Pakistan’s near-fatal obsession with India. Pakistani Army Chief, General Kayani, has frequently voiced his security philosophy as being “India-centric”, whose fears are deeply rooted in a Pakistani military mindset that will require major Indian overtures before it changes.

Throughout the past decade of the Indo-Pakistani rivalry it seems Bharat has gotten by largely unscathed by Western political leaders and Western media, especially with respect to India’s transgressions in Kashmir. The U.S. has tended to demonize Pakistan especially since 9/11 as Americans learned more about the role of Pakistan’s government, military and intelligence services in the creation, enabling and continued support of the Taliban movement that harbored Al Qaeda operatives – a perception that became even worse after the 2008 terrorist attacks carried out by Pakistani Islamic jihadists in Mumbai that killed 170 people.

Yet just last week Obama himself bore witness to India’s burgeoning and dangerous right-wing conservative Hindu nationalism, specifically the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), whose members chastised him for being soft on terror within 30 minutes of Obama’s arrival in Mumbai.

India’s hardliners have exposed themselves like never before recently, with serious and persistent attempts to quell freedom of expression in the name of national security, as they attempted to jail Arundhati Roy on charges of sedition for daring to publicly dissent as she shattered the silence about India’s brutality against the poor people of Kashmir.

Is India truly the world’s biggest democracy – or one in name only? Just as Israel cannot call itself a democracy while bulldozing Palestinian homes with impunity, India cannot claim the same while subjecting Kashmiris to draconian curfews, Gestapo tactics and disproportionate levels of military force, as the state employs overwhelming violence against Kashmir’s young “stone pelters”.

More than 112 civilians – mostly youths – have been killed and several thousand injured in this most recent infitada that broke out mid-summer. The nakedly oppressive Public Safety Act provides local authorities with latitude to incarcerate Kashmiri citizens involved in civil protest for up to 2 years if they are deemed “potential” threats to the security of the state.

India’s Chinese police state tactics have also included restricting journalists from reporting on demonstrations and even forcing closure of leading newspapers. And according to Murtaza Shibli in the Guardian, in absence of any Pakistani support to the new generation of Kashmiris, Indian claims to blame Pakistan, Islamic terrorism and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) have lost credibility even among its own population.

Amitabh Mattoo, Professor of International Studies at New Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University, has argued that the Indian government must better understand the anatomy of the uprising because unlike in the past, the writ of the state is not being challenged by militant organizations or even by a separatist cartel. Mattoo penned in the Hindustan Times this summer that:

While it’s tempting to reduce the protests to indoctrination by extremist Islamic groups, Pakistan’s machinations or the influence of other vested interests, the reality is that this radicalization has been caused by multiple factors, but above all by a sense of hopelessness.

This is a generation that has seen suffering, killings, political uncertainty, and has had to remain sequestered in their homes for great lengths of time. A generation that has witnessed often a daily tragedy, seen no light at the end of tunnel, often endured harassment, and which has been distrusted by sections of the Indian establishment, is consequently simmering with deep discontent and angst. And yet is not at an age where it can introspect and take a long-term view of matters.

Mattoo also raises the hard-to-get-around reality that India security forces seem to handle protests in India much differently than they do in Kashmir, saying that “surely, in the 21st century it should be possible to control protesters, armed only with stones, without having to kill young men and women.” The average Kashmiri finds it disturbing that while Kashmiri protests lead to deaths, protests during the Bharat bandh [i.e. India shutdown], for instance, lead to no such violence.

We’ll finish with hope. Mohammed Khaishgi wrote in a recent HuffPost piece that according to a Pew Center poll 70% of Pakistanis desire better relations with India. Although, paradoxically, he also indicated that 53% of them also view India as the country’s greatest threat. Hence, a Kashmir settlement is in order, which would directly address this dichotomy, assuming the popular General Kayani and his military are willing to adapt to the wishes of seven out of ten Pakistanis.

Posted in WorldComments Off on MICHAEL HUGHES: US KASHMIR POLICY AIDS TALIBAN

DOROTHY ONLINE NEWSLETTER

NOVANEWS

Dear Friends,

I’d promised myself to send not more than 4 items today, but ended up with 6.  Each time I went over the materials I’d gathered during the day, I ended up saying ‘I can’t not send this.” And though in the end I omitted far more than I included, have decided to let you choose what to read.  It’s after all my business to furnish information, not to tell you what to read.  I fully empathize with those of you who think it’s too much.  I never manage to read even a quarter of the 100-200 emails that I receive daily, however much I try.

Now to the items.  I don’t know whether to classify item one as racist or as a picture of current Israeli ethics.  MK Hanin Zuabi was invited by student members of her party, Balad, to come and speak at a conference that they had planned to hold.  Knesset members are allowed by law to come to Israeli universities to participate in events, unless (and this is the big big usual ‘unless’) there is a problem with security.  Always easy to stir things up, so security can always be a potential problem.  That did not stop the right-wing fundamentalist fascists from marching through the Arab village of Um el-Fahm.  But this time it wasn’t fascists that were at issue. 

It was a member of the Knesset who had been invited by students belonging to her party to come.  Of course she was met by Israeli Jews, super duper student nationalists, with name calling and the singing of Hatikva (the Israeli anthem)!  Stinking!  Would they have treated Jews (Jeff Halper, Neta Golan, Amira Hass, for instance) who sailed to Gaza to break the blockade?  Perhaps.  Whether they would have or not, the incident today was ugly.  Ugly doubly, first that it happened, and second that the student support the blockade rather than censure it.

Item 2 intrigued me.  The Ministry of Education has decided to introduce debating into the schools. If they follow the rules, I think it’s wonderful.  It surely is one way to get people to think.  True, it’s been many a year since I took part in debating (close to 60 years, to be exact).  Still, I presume that successful debating still means working on both sides of the question being debated.  Each year a single subject is designated for all who participate. 

So there is time to work on both sides of the question.  During actual meets in my day we did not know until only a few minutes before we met our opponent on which side of the question we would be debating.  So we had to be fully prepared.  If the rules today are anything like the ones were in my day, then maybe for a change the preparation will get kids thinking for a change.  Not a bad habit to acquire.

In item 3 Akiva Eldar tells us that “Jerusalem must be divided” and why.  Worth reading.  I personally prefer an undivided Israel—one nation with equal rights for all its citizens.  Nevertheless, Eldar in this op-ed gives facts worth knowing.

Item 4 reports on Israel’s unsuccessful attempts to convince Norway to stop “exporting multimedia aimed at de-legitimizing Israel.”  Am so glad to see that Norway had the decency to say no.

Item 5 Furnishes a glimpse of what some (perhaps most) of Israel’s artists, actors, poets, etc think about the present Minister of Sports and Culture, Limor Livnat—a firm right-winger who should have left her politics at home!

The final item is there primarily because of the last line, that is, the final statement!  Don’t jump down to see it in advance.  If you have had more than enough reading by the time you get to 6, put it away for another day.  But read the article. The end makes much better sense when lead up to.  

All the best,

Dorothy

————————————————— 

1. Haaretz,

November 15, 2010

Haifa U. students protest ban on Israeli Arab MK who sailed on Gaza flotilla

Hanin Zuabi claims the university is using ‘Shin Bet tactics’ in order to limit Arab student activity.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/haifa-u-students-protest-ban-on-israeli-arab-mk-who-sailed-on-gaza-flotilla-1.324701

By Jack Khoury

Balad party supporters at the University of Haifa will hold a rally there today to protest the university’s refusal to allow MK Hanin Zuabi of Balad to participate in a student political activity on campus.

Zuabi became an object of controversy for taking part in the Turkish flotilla aimed at breaking Israel’s blockade of Gaza in May, which ended with an Israeli naval raid and on-board skirmish that left nine Turkish citizens dead.

The MK had been scheduled to participate Monday in a student activity focusing on the political situation over the past year, and there is a chance she may show up despite the ban.

“No one can prevent me from going to a university and standing together with my constituency,” Zuabi wrote in a letter to Yoav Lavee, the dean of students. “My participation in the event is part of my parliamentary activities, just as my participation in the freedom flotilla constituted a humanitarian, ethical, civic and political obligation of the first order and was part of my parliamentary activities.”

Zuabi said the university was using the same tactics as the Shin Bet security service to keep Arab political activity to a minimum.

“The Shin Bet generally uses the argument of ‘disturbing the public order’ to limit the political and public activity of Arab citizens, and that’s what the university is doing, with the goal of limiting Arab student activity,” she said.

The Balad campus group asked the university on October 24 for permission to have Zuabi take part in the activity, but got no response until yesterday.

Lavee told the Balad group, which was expecting between 150 and 200 students at the activity, that Zuabi could not come because various groups on campus were planning to use the event as an excuse for exhibiting violent behavior. 

Knesset members are explicitly entitled by law to go to any public place in the country, except for national security-related limitations.

===========================================

2. Haaretz,

November 15, 2010

Ministry hoping to tap into the art of argument

High-school debate clubs will face off against each other in early January as part of a new joint venture between the Education Ministry and the nonprofit Citizens’ Empowerment Center in Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/ministry-hoping-to-tap-into-the-art-of-argument-1.324692

By Or Kashti

High-school debate clubs will face off against each other in early January as part of a new joint venture between the Education Ministry and the nonprofit Citizens’ Empowerment Center in Israel. The finals will be held on March 8, International Women’s Day: The topic for the 2010-2011 school year is gender issues in Israel.

The Education Ministry hopes to expand the project next year to the national level.

Some 30 high-school civics and social science teachers recently completed a six-session seminar on the basics of debating. While there have been local debating activities in the past, the new project is the first to receive ministerial support.

The current initiative, which unlike past efforts focuses on training teachers in debate, has the backing of Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar. This year 20 schools, mostly in the center of the country, are participating, but next year organizers hope there will be more than 100.

The art of formal debate is much less developed in local schools than in European and U.S. ones, where it is taught sometimes in elementary school.

The program is part of the ministry’s “Year of the Hebrew Language” and also ties in with efforts to introduce advanced teaching methods.

“Our students need to improve their rhetorical and oral expression skills,” said the ministry’s national social sciences education coordinator, Dana Friedman. Friedman, who is involved in the project, says it also constitutes “an excellent foundation for encounters between various social groups, cultures and [ethnic] sectors.”

Teachers in the seminar learned about the culture of debate, strategies for introducing and refuting arguments, and gender issues. According to Reut Nadav, who taught the seminar and will continue to guide the project, debating is “a method that seeks to develop students’ thinking abilities and makes the students much more involved.”

Nadav says that while in the classroom girls may compete with boys for the teacher’s attention, “they blossom in debate class. They don’t have to claim their place, it’s ‘guaranteed’ to them, thanks to the rules of debate.”

“The common denominator among many of the world’s leaders, including Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu, is that at some point they learned the theories of persuasion and debate,” says CECI executive director Yuval Lipkin. “The program gives teachers the ability to pass on the tools for developing rhetorical abilities so that students can improve their powers of persuasion and their public speaking abilities.”

Teachers will judge the first round of debates between schools. In the finals the panels will be joined by Yoni Cohen-Idov, 2010 champion of the World Universities Debating Championship. 

Nadav stresses that the judges base their decisions on the quality of the arguments used “It’s important to be charismatic,” she said, “but more attention is paid to content than style.”

===========================

3. Haaretz,

November 15, 2010

Jerusalem must be divided

Even in Jerusalem, lies that are repeated too often do not become true. The truth has been and remains: either Jerusalem will become the capital of two peoples or Israel will become the state of two peoples.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/jerusalem-must-be-divided-1.324728

By Akiva Eldar

President Barack Obama does not hand out U.S. graces at half price, for example a temporary freeze in settlement construction. In order to receive the generous package of American incentives put before him, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is required to hand over a list of Jewish settlements that will be wiped off the map. This list must include Hebron and Shiloh, the Jordan Valley and the northern Dead Sea, and also East Jerusalem.

On the map hanging in Netanyahu’s office, such broad swaths of territory are labeled “Jerusalem,” and on other maps around the world they are noted as “occupied territories.” No country recognizes the annexation of 70 square kilometers of West Bank territory into the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem (whose area was 6.4 square kilometers under Jordanian rule ). Opposing a withdrawal from East Jerusalem will no doubt lead to a failure in the negotiations and turning our back on a two-state solution.

Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak is credited with making the first attempt to break the taboo over the political division of Jerusalem (in every other way Jerusalem has remained divided ). Ehud Olmert followed in his footsteps and drew a line between the Jewish and Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem.

Opinion polls have shown that the Jewish-Israeli public began shaking off false cliches that have been used to cover up the failure to do anything about the poorest city in Israel. Many have grown accustomed to the idea that they will have to give up on the Shuafat refugee camp and a quarter million Palestinians. Since the dispute broke over the settlement freeze, hardly a day has gone by without Netanyahu or his spokesmen issuing another legend glorifying the myth of “the eternal capital that will never be divided.”

Netanyahu: “Israel sees no relationship between the peace process and the policy of planning and construction in Jerusalem, which has not changed for 40 years… Construction in Jerusalem will never disrupt the peace process.”

The Facts: Following Netanyahu’s decision in early 1997 (when he first served as prime minister ) to build the neighborhood of Har Homa in East Jerusalem, the Arab League held a special emergency session. Secretary General Ismat Abdel Magid condemned the “policy of Judaizing Jerusalem, which aims to create facts on the ground on the eve of negotiations for a permanent settlement.”

Jordan’s King Hussein dispatched a sharply worded message to Netanyahu, warning that the plan would lead to an outburst of emotions. Egypt expressed concern about the damage the project would inflict on the peace process. U.S. President Bill Clinton promised Palestinian Authority head Yasser Arafat that he would press Netanyahu to freeze the plans. But the Israeli leader rejected all appeals and Hamas won another victory against the peace process.

Netanyahu: “Jerusalem is united, the capital of the Jewish people and its sovereignty is incontrovertible.”

The Facts: According to the road map, approved in May 2003 by the Sharon government (and in which Netanyahu served as a senior minister ), the permanent agreement that was meant to be signed in 2005 would include “an agreed, just, fair, and realistic solution to the refugee issue, and a negotiated resolution on the status of Jerusalem.” It also said that in the first phase the government of Israel would reopen the Palestinian trade office and other Palestinian institutions closed in East Jerusalem. Moreover, two Israeli prime ministers have already set the precedent that Israel’s sovereignty over East Jerusalem is disputed.

Netanyahu: “All Jerusalem residents can acquire homes in every part of the city.”

The Facts: There is a clause in the Israel Lands Administration leasing agreements that enables them to void the purchase of a home if the buyer is not an Israeli citizen or not entitled to make aliyah on the basis of the Right of Return (in other words, is not a Jew ). An investigative report published by Nir Hasson on November 5 (“State gave East Jerusalem lands to rightist groups without tenders” ), exposed the symbiotic relationship between the government and elements on the right, who aim to push the Arabs out of East Jerusalem. The Netanyahu government is the first to have given over to the Elad NGO the City of David national park, without a tender. One of the directors of the NGO has said in the past that the group’s aim is “to take hold of areas of East Jerusalem in order to create unalterable conditions in the Holy Basin around the Old City.” 

Even in Jerusalem, lies that are repeated too often do not become true. The truth has been and remains: either Jerusalem will become the capital of two peoples or Israel will become the state of two peoples.

====================================================

4. Ynet,

November 15, 2010

Diplomatic Row

    Israel: Norway inciting against us

Foreign Ministry says Norwegian authorities funding anti-Israel film, exhibition, and play. Norway: We support freedom of expression

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3984621,00.html

Itamar Eichner

Serious diplomatic conflict: Israel is accusing the Norwegian government of funding and encouraging blatant anti-Israel incitement.

According to reports received by the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem, the Trondheim Municipality is funding a trip to New York for students taking part in the “Gaza Monologues” play, which “deals with the suffering of children in Gaza as a result of the Israeli occupation.”

The play, written by a Palestinian from Gaza, will be presented at the United Nations headquarters. It joins an exhibition by a Norwegian artists displayed in Damascus, Beirut, and Amman, with the help of Norway’s embassies in Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan.

The exhibition shows killed Palestinian babies next to Israel Defense Forces helmets, which are reminiscent of Nazi soldiers’ helmets, and an Israeli flag drenched in blood.

The Norwegians are also helping the distribution of a documentary film called “Tears of Gaza” to festivals across the world. According to the Foreign Ministry, the film deals with the suffering of Gaza’s children as well, without mentioning Hamas, the rockets fired at Israel, and Israel’s right to defend itself. 

The film shows Gazans chanting, “Itbah al-Yahud,” but the Norwegian translation says “slaughter the Israelis” instead of “slaughter the Jews”. 

In addition, a book written by two Norwegian doctors who were the only foreigners in Gaza to give interviews during Operation Cast Lead was published recently. The book, which accuses IDF soldiers of deliberately killing women and children, is a bestseller in Norway and has been warmly recommended by none other than Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre.

The Israeli Embassy in Norway strongly protested the authorities’ involvement in Israel’s demonization. “The open and official Norwegian policy talks about understanding and reconciliation,” a senior Israeli official said Sunday evening, “but ever since the war in Gaza, Norway has become a superpower in terms of exporting multimedia aimed at de-legitimizing Israel, while using the Norwegian taxpayer funds for creating and transporting this multimedia.”

Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon said in a meeting with Norwegian parliament members that “such activity pushes away the chance for reconciliation and encourages a radicalization in the Palestinian stand which prevents them from compromising.”  

The Norwegians responded to the Israeli criticism by saying that the government supports the freedom of expressions and will not intervene in artistic content.

========================================

5. Haaretz,

November 15, 2010

There you have it: culture

Demonstrations over the issue of occupation have been raging here for 30 years , and majority of those who were first to write, protest and demonstrate were academics and creative artists.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/there-you-have-it-culture-1.324725

By Niva Lanir

A person who loves books, music, theater, art and film wakes up one day to find Limor Livnat his minister of culture. The appointment does not please him. But, he reminds himself, that’s how things go in a coalition democracy: The cabinet table must sometimes be as flexible as Nadia Comaneci.

After a few months, it becomes clear that her term of office will not evoke comparisons with those of Andre Malraux or Melina Mercouri. What happens in France is reserved for the French, and ditto for what happens in Greece. We, the Israelis, will have to adorn ourselves with Livnat’s regime of criteria: changing the criteria for supporting theaters and creating new criteria for a prize for Zionist creative work.

There is more than a little hypocrisy in the story of the dedication of a new cultural center in Ariel and the artists’ call to other artists not to perform there. After all, this is not the first time there have been arguments in this country over the future of the occupied territories. Demonstrations over the question of whether to divide the land and what its borders should be have been raging here for 30 years already. Uncountable numbers of words have been written on the subject of Zionism and the occupation. A prime minister has been murdered over this issue. And no, my memory is not mistaken: A majority of those who were first to write, protest and demonstrate over these issues were academics and creative artists.

The public did not always scorn them. Once, they were even called “intellectuals.” Prime ministers, including the current one, used to pursue them and listen attentively to their words. Sometimes, when it suited them, they even enjoyed these interactions.

But to Livnat and Ariel Mayor Ron Nachman, the artists’ names and numbers are not important. They were and will remain a “handful” of “lunatics.” There you have it: the culture of our culture minister.

Contrary to the minister’s claim, the heart of the matter is neither culture nor the cultural center, but the occupation and the fact that we are an occupying nation. Nor do we need Livnat to decide who is a Zionist. Her work has been done by others. Those who oppose the idea generally proclaim their post-Zionism publicly.

Let’s go back to the prize for a Zionist creative work. First, we are a country of prizes. Last Friday, the Culture and Sports Ministry ran an advertisement announcing the award of the minister’s prize for this year’s best literary works – seven prizes in all. The prime minister awards prizes for literary and musical works (Levi Eshkol gave out the first ones ) to 12, and sometimes even 14, creative artists every year. Then we have the Israel Prize in various fields – the Bialik, Brenner, Tchernichovsky, ACUM, Ophir, Sapir and other prizes. Altogether, I’ve counted 25 prizes well-known to the public that are granted to 100 or more winners every year.

And now there will be one more, a Zionist prize. Yet rereading the writings of some past prize winners raises a question: Is there any chance those writers could win a prize today? Take Yosef Haim Brenner, for instance. Just open “From Here and There” and decide for yourself whether this is a Zionist work. Nor am I convinced that Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s “Samson” could pass Livnat’s test.

And then there’s the person who wrote, “Zionism, as I perceive it, includes not only the yearning for a plot of promised land legally acquired for our weary people, but also the yearning for moral and spiritual fulfillment.” Oops, Herzl is also out. 

The mother of Italian historian Carlo Ginzburg was the author Natalia Ginzburg. Perhaps it was his mother’s influence that prompted Ginzburg to ask and answer (in an interview with Sefy Hendler in Haaretz’s Hebrew edition on November 1 ): “What is my country? The country of which I am ashamed.” We’re lucky that at least a “handful” still have a pinch of shame for all of us.

====================

6.  New York Times,

November 15, 2010

Madam Secretary’s Middle East

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/16/opinion/16iht-edcohen.html?_r=1&ref=global

By ROGER COHEN

LONDON — I like the look of President Barack Obama’s new Middle East envoy, a person with broad experience, the trust of Israelis, growing support among West Bank Palestinians and a fierce personal conviction that a peace accord is essential not only for the parties but for United States national security.

The surprise appointment reflects the need to bring maximum heft to U.S. mediation efforts at a time when Obama himself, major international powers and the Palestinian government led by Prime Minister Salaam Fayyad have all set a target of achieving Palestinian statehood by the second half of 2011.

You missed the announcement? Well it was made so quietly, more through osmosis than anything, that overlooking the change was easy. So here’s the administration’s Middle East shift: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has taken charge.

Oh, I know, George Mitchell, the special envoy who has labored since early 2009, endures. But the heavy lifting is now in Clinton’s hands. Officials in Washington, Jerusalem and Ramallah tell me that the secretary of state will lead what her husband recently called the attempt to “finish Rabin’s work.”

“She’s not insecure about Israel, she will call the shots as she sees them,” a senior U.S. official said. “And she would not be engaged if she did not feel there was a way to get there.”

Clinton’s new role was evident last week. During a video conference with Fayyad, she announced $150 million in direct U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority (and said America was “deeply disappointed” by “counterproductive” Israeli housing plans in East Jerusalem). The next day she went into nearly eight hours of talk with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that opened the negotiations door a crack.

Before I get to that, some background. The Clinton of today is not the Clinton of a decade ago. Compare that sharp criticism of Israel’s East Jerusalem building with her 1999 position that Jerusalem is “the eternal and indivisible capital of Israel.” Somewhere in the past decade her conviction hardened that the state of Palestine is achievable, inevitable and compatible with Israeli security.

“A bit of an epiphany,” in the words of one aide, came in March 2009 on the road to Ramallah. “We drove in a motorcade and you could see the settlements high up, and the brutality of it was so stark,” this aide said. “Everyone got quite silent and as we approached Ramallah there were these troops in berets. They were so professional, we thought at first they were Israel Defense Forces. But, no, they were Palestinians, this completely professional outfit, and it was clear this was something new.”

That “something” is fundamental: the transition from a self-pitying, self-dramatizing Palestinian psyche, with all the cloying accoutrements of victimhood, to a self-affirming culture of pragmatism and institution-building. The shift is incomplete. But it has won Clinton over. And it’s powerful enough to pose a whole new set of challenges to Israel: Palestine is serious now.

Another moment came in September 2010 when Clinton held a meeting with Fayyad that threw her schedule off because it ran so long. Fayyad is Mr. Self-Empowerment, the Palestinian who, at last, has put facts before “narrative,” growth before grumbling, roads before ranting, and security before everything. Clinton, I was told, has “strong views” on Fayyad. She said last week she had “great confidence” in him.

Clinton has been a darling of Israelis since she her early days as a senator for New York. That distinguishes her from Obama, who is mistrusted in Israel, and it gives her leverage. Her Palestinian convictions are more recent but intense. She gets how negotiations must move in tandem with Palestinian change on the ground.

If anyone can persuade Israel that its self-interest involves self-criticism, that occupation is corrosive, that its long-term security demands compromise, and that a new Palestine is emerging, it’s Clinton. If anyone can persuade Palestinians that self-pitying unilateralism (“Help us! Recognize an occupied state!”) is the way of the past and a road to nowhere, it’s Clinton.

I haven’t talked about the 90-day extension of Israel’s moratorium on settlement building that Clinton seems to have engineered. It’s positive but a detail. Some looming big issues are obvious: borders, Jerusalem, refugees. Others are less predictable but potentially explosive.

First: The latest Fatah-Hamas reconciliation efforts in Damascus have failed, defeated by differences on security. Fatah itself is beset by sharp divisions — over President Mahmoud Abbas’s leadership and the peace effort. Can Palestinians keep their eye on the prize this time?

Second: New U.S. security guarantees provided to Israel include 20 fighter jets. But what of Iran? Netanyahu wants Obama to build a credible military threat. Ascendant Republicans bay for war. Clinton has to persuade Israel the best way to disarm Iran is by removing the core of Tehran’s propaganda — the plight of stateless Palestinians.

Third: Netanyahu is tight with the Republicans who now control the House. He feels stronger vis-à-vis Obama. His temptation to play for time will grow as 2012 draws closer.

But time is not in Israel’s favor: Just look what happened to Hillary Clinton over the past decade and extrapolate from that.

Posted in Middle EastComments Off on DOROTHY ONLINE NEWSLETTER

THE MAKINGS OF A POLICE STATE

NOVANEWS

November 14, 2010

by Sibel Edmonds

Little Steps Towards the Big Leap?

Time To Test our Might & Will

By Sibel Edmonds STAFF WRITER

The movement against TSA’s systematic degradation of our nation seems to be gaining a bit of momentum; long overdue. A few lawmakers are making some noise. Let’s hope it is not for show only.

Pilots and related organizations have been making a little headway. And we have more than a few citizens coming up with and organizing actionable plans and ideas. I hope none of this ends up settling for ‘little bones.’ By that I mean quasi cosmetic changes like: giving our CNN’s Fitzpatrick what she is asking for – a heads up and notice signs for coming violations at check points, or installing separate screening detectors for the pilots and flight attendants, or having the screener police touch and violate you using three fingers instead of their entire palm. We seem to have momentum.

I believe with solidarity and persistence, refusing to give up or give in to a few ‘bones’ we will succeed. Please watch out for ‘highly coincidental’ terror alerts that may start popping up. OK? After ten years of those interestingly timed and never-sourced possible terror alerts we should be wise enough to recognize our government’s ‘cry wolf’ practices.

Also, get ready for a handful of questionable entities who try to blend in with the movement and engage in repulsive (highly offensive) actions to cause backlash for our movement. Our government highly depends on ‘this type’ and of course, our mainstream media loves to showcase them. I am just saying.

I’ve been going through hundreds of e-mails and comments on my previous post. First, I want to thank you for sharing your thoughts and suggestions both publicly in various forums and privately through your direct e-mails; your feedback gives me a sense of solidarity and revives my long-dimming hopes. Next, I  am going to tell you a bit about myself and what I am prepared to do, however insignificant or little it may seem to some. So many of us either don’t do anything or say anything publicly because we as a nation have been long reduced to seeing ourselves and acting as insignificant and powerless subjects of those who govern. We are afraid of being ridiculed, or being rejected as feeble.

That’s not the case here at Boiling Frogs Post, and I hope you’ll get that sense and keep your ideas and suggestions coming. You see, I am doing it despite my own set of reservations, and regardless of the ridicule I sometimes endure from the ‘elite academics & talk-and-write only mighty experts.’

Those of you who’ve been members here know that I usually don’t talk about, share, personal information. This is a slight exception, and you’ll see why:…

The Discretion Factor & TSA Black Hole  (FROM JULY, 2009)  www.boilingfrogspost.com

Police State USA

Around 1:00 p.m. on March 9, 2009 I stood in front of the US Air ticket counter in Ft Myers, Florida, and sighed with relief. I had just checked in two suitcases and had an hour and fifteen minutes before boarding my plane to Washington, DC. I was relieved because it is no simple task to make it this far with a teething seven month old baby, two suitcases, a carry on bag, and a diaper bag. However, I was counting my chickens too early.

I joined a fairly long line at the entrance of the TSA security screening station, and did a quick inventory of preparations needed to make it to the other side: My infant girl was securely nestled against my chest inside her baby carrier; I had no liquids in the diaper bag or elsewhere, and that included the bottled water I would need to fix her formula later while on the plane (I had enough time to purchase the water on the other side); I was wearing fairly easy to remove trainers, knowing the difficulty of removing shoes while carrying my infant and holding my boarding passes and drivers license…Basically, based on the Transportation Security Agency’s (TSA) posted rules, I was all set, or so I thought.

I bent over, removed my trainers and placed them on the screening belt. By this time I could sense my infant daughter’s tension from the way she was holding on to me. I couldn’t blame her; with the suffocating congestion of hassled and rushed people in the line closing in on her, the sound of screaming TSA officers reciting the rules at the security check point’s entrance ‘make sure you remove your shoes…’ ‘place all your liquid containers in clear plastic bags…,’ and with her mommy almost squashing her to bend over and remove my shoes, how could I blame her?!

As I approached the metal detector portal I looked ahead and sighed with relief one more time. A few more seconds, and I’d be there; among ‘the checked and let through’ on the other side; one of the lucky crowd who’d made it through.

My daughter and I went through the detector smoothly and silently – the darn thing didn’t blow it’s darn ear-scratching siren. However, waiting on the other side with hands on her plump hips was a badge wearing TSA officer. She pointed at me and sternly yelled, ‘Ma’am, go back again! Remove that baby carrier, put it on the belt, and come through the detector again.’

Confused, I looked at her and asked, ‘But why? I didn’t set off the detector! There are no metal pieces on this carrier, and as you see, it is fabric with no pockets or bags attached…’

The Badge-Woman yelled even louder, ‘Ma’am, you are holding up the line. Just go back and do as I say! We don’t allow wearable baby carriers through the detectors…’

I knew that was not true. I had traveled with my child several times and had gone through screening stations at several airports while carrying my child in the carrier attached in the front, same as here. But I didn’t want to hold up the lines and add hassle to the already hassled crowd waiting in line right behind me. Those of you who are parents and have traveled with infants don’t need me to tell you, but for those of you who have not experienced it let me put it this way, ‘it’s no easy task’!

I tucked the boarding pass and my license under my chin. Next, I unbuckled the side-fasteners of the carrier, while watching carefully where I was stepping, because the tiled floor was smeared with some syrupy soda making it slippery. Then, I wiggled my daughter out if the carrier, tucked her under my left arm, while unfastening the rest of the carrier from my waist and shoulder…By this time my baby was wailing; from top of her lungs.

I passed through the detector again with the wailing baby tucked under my arm. Now I had to retrieve my shoes, my hand bag, my carryon, the baby carrier, the diaper bag, which were all piled up at the other end of the security screening belt. Have you ever done this while holding a baby? I don’t think I have to tell you what hell that is…

After I gathered my stuff, with sweat pouring from every pore, I turned around and made my way towards the badge-woman. I stopped right in front of her, looked her in the eye, and said,‘I would like to know why you put me through that when I was cleared first time through. I have gone through five airport security points with my child in a carrier, and no one ever asked me to remove the carrier. I believe TSA rules are supposed to be uniform.’

She snapped back ‘Move on. I don’t have to answer your question.’

I tried very hard to remain calm, and responded, ‘Yes you do. You need to provide me with a response; with an answer…’ She took out her hand-held radio and called her supervisor, ‘We have a big problem here. Someone is disrupting our procedure…’

In less than two minutes two female supervisors clad in suits showed up. The older one with hair glued in the air with two cans of hairspray and make-up two inches thick listened as I repeated my question, then she responded,

‘I am afraid we cannot provide you with an answer. We can’t share our security criteria with you. They are all classified.’

I almost gasped, ‘Why?’

She responded: ‘Because to announce our criteria, our rules, would tip off the terrorists.’

I countered that: ‘You have a list of rules at the check point entrance regarding liquid, shoes, lighters and matches…There is no section there referring to baby carriers. And, I have been through several airports, and none had any issue with the carriers. Are you saying there is a rule on carriers but it is considered secret and classified?’

She blinked several times with eyelashes bending downward from the weight of gunky mascara mud clumped on top of them. Next, with a voice raised about two notches higher she responded ‘Okay. It is not in the actual classified rules. We do things based on ‘Discretion.’ This is one of those. We have discretion.’

I asked again, ‘Okay. I would like to see the guidelines governing this discretion. That way I’ll know how to prepare for security in the future, as I did with your rules on shoes, water, liquid baby formula…’

She snapped back, ‘we have unlimited discretion. There are no rules. And we don’t have to answer your questions…’

I didn’t move, and I repeated my question, and added ‘Unlimited discretion? You mean you can also take us in and do a cavity search based on this discretion? This sounds like unlimited authority, and as a citizen, as a taxpayer, I have the right to know…’

At this point she took out her radio and called the airport police while I stood there looking and listening in disbelief. When two uniformed local airport police showed up, the TSA supervisor told them, ‘This lady insists on seeing our internal rules and classified procedures. I believe she poses a threat at this point and would like to have you either arrest her or keep her under observation until we decide to clear her for travel…’

That’s right. As a petite 5’4, 105 pound mother with an infant I was either being placed under arrest or observation as a security threat because I dared to question my rights and my government’s rules on security screening of its citizens.

The police officer, a gentlemanly young man, looked disgusted with the TSA supervisor. He turned to me and said,

‘Ma’am, why don’t you stop asking these questions and just proceed to your gate? We don’t want to be forced to act on this.’

I calmly responded, ‘Officer, I will proceed as soon as I am provided with an answer. If this is a cause for arrest now, and if you think you can back it up with probable cause, then please go ahead. You know and I know that this is not lawful.’

At the end of the security screening belt, as these events were unfolding, people were rushing past us towards their gates. Most of them were avoiding eye contact; maybe it was too much for them to actual see the reality and the state of their mobility on display before them. Some were shooting quick wondering glances. A very few brave ones actually slowed down or paused to whisper things like, ‘This is disgusting,’ or ‘they have no right to treat people like this,’ or, ‘this is a shame,’…

The TSA supervisor, seeing that her bluff did not have the desired effect and a bit nervously, changed her tune,

‘All we are doing is protecting you and everyone else from the terrorists. These procedures, these measures, are all for your own good; for your own safety.’

I repeated myself one more time, ‘And how do baby carriers pose a threat? How about the endangerment you caused my infant by having me walk across the slippery floor while holding her, handling my belongings…?’

She gave her best line of reasoning, ‘If I remember correctly some one, in some country, tried to hide explosives in a baby toy, or a baby stroller, or something like that…You know how the terrorists used airplanes and lack of airport security to blow up and kill thousands of our people…’

I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry at this lame and irrational excuse, ‘Okay, in Bali and in India terrorists blew up resorts and hotels, and people got injured and killed. Does this mean we now have to stack up barriers in front of our hotels and resorts, and have government security agents march in front of them? The terrorists hit some fast food chain joint in Turkey; does this mean we now have to have metal detectors and guards in front of our restaurants? With this line of reasoning where will we stop? Will we ever stop?’

By this time I had already missed my plane. Disgustedly I walked towards the US Air counter to get my refund, go rent a car, and drive 20 hours back home. As I walked away with the two police officers accompanying me, the young male officer said sympathetically,‘Ma’am, I am so sorry for that. Even we can’t argue with these TSA guys. Now they are carrying badges and guns, and we see all sorts of abuses, dumb calls, but they are high with a sense of power…’

I don’t know how but I managed to smile, and said ‘I know. My organization has 50 or so DHS/TSA whistleblowers, and I’ve heard stories worse than this…They are able to assert these abusive powers and practices because most people, the majority, just like you, would rather back off and put up with their abuse of power…Does this sound American to you?’

Before I turned the corner I stopped, turned around, and looked at the line moving forward at the security check point. The imagery was almost symbolic. People stopping by the security belt; bending over humbly, as if before Roman Gods or Pharos, to remove their shoes. Then, like a herd of sheep, while holding up their IDs and boarding passes, they took little steps towards the detectors while looking at the other side, hoping soon they’d be ‘cleared’ and ‘allowed’ to join the others who’d ‘made’ it.

# # # #

The No Fly List, also called the terrorist watch list, is a secret list created and maintained by the US government of people who are not permitted to board a plane for travel in or out of the country. The list includes at least 1 million names as of now, up 32% since 2007 as reported by USA Today in March 2009. On September 11, 2001, the FBI’s ‘no transport’ list had the names of 16 people were considered to present a specific known or suspected threat to aviation.

Let’s look at TSA’s definition of No Fly and Selectee list from their own website:

    What are the watch lists? Historically, nine government agencies maintained watch lists with names of known or suspected terrorists and criminals. Two of these lists, the “No Fly” and “Selectee” lists were maintained by TSA. The “No Fly” list is a list of individuals who are prohibited from boarding an aircraft. The “Selectee” list is a list of individuals who must undergo additional security screening before being permitted to board an aircraft. After 9/11 the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) was created through a Presidential Directive to be administered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, in cooperation with the Departments of Homeland Security, Defense, State, and Treasury, as well as the Central Intelligence Agency.

    The purpose for the TSC is to consolidate terrorism based watch lists in one central database, the Terrorist Screening Center Database (TSDB), and make that data available for use in screening. Intelligence and law enforcement agencies nominate individuals to be put on the watch list based on established criteria, with the list maintained by the TSC. TSA’s “No-Fly” and “Selectee” lists are subsets of the TSDB and are maintained by the TSC.

According to a report issued by the General Accounting Office, the “no fly” list is just one of 12 terrorist and criminal watch lists maintained by the federal government.

In the sub header of this piece I refer to this list and the entire system as a ‘black hole’ because the list is sort of a secret, how you end up there is sort of a secret, their criteria for the list is sort of a secret, and if or how an innocent citizen can get off this list also happens to be a secret. Pay attention to the vague, ambigious definition by the TSA cited above. Go to and comb through their entire site and you’ll still come up empty handed as to how or why you may end up on their list, or how you can find out about it, or how you can get yourself off of their list.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) issued a report after it obtained limited information on the No Fly and Selectee lists through FOIA:

“Since the TSA took over, the watch list “has expanded almost daily as Intelligence Community agencies and the Office of Homeland Security continue to request the addition of individuals to the No-Fly and Selectee lists.” (TSA Watchlists memo) The names are approved for inclusion on the basis of a secret criteria. The Watchlists memo notes that “all individuals have been added or removed … based on the request of and information provided, almost exclusively by [redacted].”

There are two primary principles that guide the placement on the lists, but these principles have been withheld. The documents do not show whether there is a formal approval process where an independent third party entity is charged with verifying that the names are selected appropriately and that the information is accurate.”

As one of our readers, Jean Carbonneau, brought to our attention, one of the main reasons people don’t react as they should to such a Kafkaesque police system is that they don’t consider themselves ‘affected.’ They may get a bit grumpy at those long lines in the airports, or the patting and probing, but many consider it just ‘necessary added security,’ move on, and get used to it.

When these people, the majority, read about these lists they brush it off as tools directed towards real criminals and terrorists suspects; you know, a tool to protect us against those darn hairy dark-skin foreigners who spend their lives planning to blow us up… They need to see and hear and read about tens if not hundreds of thousands of good ole Americans with spotless records who for one reason or another have ended up in the DHS’ black hole, and most likely due to some ‘discretion.’ Sure, the mainstream media has covered it a tiny bit; certainly not enough; at least not as much as they’ve been covering and exagerating the threats of vague terrorists and boogiemen.

If you come across those, which I am sure you do every single day, have them read the story of a Former US Diplomat John Graham, who actually received an award by the first President Bush for his NGO work, and who somehow ended up in the black hole. Let them read Graham’s own words:

“I’m being accused of a serious–even treasonous–criminal intent by a faceless bureaucracy, with no chance (that I can find) to refute any errors or false charges. (…) Whether it’s a mistake or whether somebody with the power to hassle me really thinks I am a threat, the stark absence of due process is unsettling. The worst of it is that being put on a list of America’s enemies seems to be permanent.

The TSA form states: “the TSA clearance process will not remove a name from the Watch Lists. Instead this process distinguishes passengers from persons who are in fact on the Watch Lists by placing their names and identifying information in a cleared portion of the Lists” (which may or may not, the form continues, reduce the airport hassles).

In protecting ourselves, we can’t allow our leaders to continue to create a climate of fear and mistrust, to destroy our civil liberties and, in so doing, to change who we are as a nation. What a victory that would be for our enemies! And what a betrayal of real patriots, and to so many in the wider world who still remember this country as a source of inspiration and hope.”

…or have them check out many stories of US veterans, nuns, doctors, starred generals, librarians…who found themselves in this nightmare of being listed by their government, and learned that there isn’t much they can do to clear themselves:

Bill McDonald, 60, a retired Air Force colonel has a chest full of ribbons and enough frustration with the TSA to fill a bucket.

“With my two tours in Vietnam and active service in support of Desert Storm I find myself a terrorist suspect?,” McDonald says. “Seemingly not even my Top Secret, nuclear and satellite related clearances plus over 26 and half years of service mean much,” he says. “You can surely imagine my disgust at being identified on a terror watch list.”

Although McDonald has flown several times since 9/11, it wasn’t until just last year that he started having problems checking in. McDonald and his wife were fond of online check-in procedures but were rejected and told to report to the ticket counter. “That was our first clue something was wrong.”

When a ticket agent told McDonald he was on the watch list, he was stunned. He took out his military I.D. card that he always carries, but it was of little help. He missed that flight because of the added security.

“I was just kind of flabbergasted that I had to play this game, but decided that I wasn’t going to be reactive,” he said.

He has pulled together all the needed information to apply for clearance, but says he’s hesitating submitting the forms because of all the information they require.

“Somehow, hearing about the wrongful use of info by the TSA does not give me a comfort zone,” McDonald said. “I say this despite the fact that I know I am all over the data bases in the government.”

…or have them watch the following video of the TSA detention, harassment, and abuse of a Ron Paul organization official which was caught on tape at a St. Louis airport:

VIDEO REMOVED BY YOU TUBE

…tell these people that they or their family members or their friends can easily end up on a secret list for secret reasons by secret persons working behind the walls of their government secret’s agencies. And, that there ain’t a darn thing they can do, or anywhere or any person to go to, even if there were, they wouldn’t know about it, since that too would be secret.

Posted in USAComments Off on THE MAKINGS OF A POLICE STATE

GLADIO, HOW WE TERRORIZE OURSELVES

NOVANEWS

November 14, 2010

 by Gordon Duff

GLADIO, HOW AMERICA AND NATO INVENTED TERRORISM

“NOT ONE TERRORIST IN A HUNDRED….A THOUSAND…..IS REAL”

By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

(EDITOR’S NOTE:  Wikpedia’s report on Operation Gladio is reproduced below.  This is a threatened document, an important part of our history.  Help preserve it.)

How many Americans have heard of Operation Gladio?  Many ask, how could simple Arabs or even Israel, put together an organization capable of 9/11? 

If, as 78% of Australians indicate, in a recent Herald Sun poll, America planned 9/11 herself, how did a democracy lose its way?  How did America’s intelligence and defense groups become terrorists?  When did it happen and why? 

The answer isn’t simple, it started decades ago, when the world was at the edge of obliteration and two systems, or what we then believed were systems, fought for the hearts and minds of the world.

Today, all that sounds childish.  A mature look at the Cold War looks more like two rats fighting over a corpse.  Then, however, some saw it as “light and dark,” clear as that.  Many believed the Soviet Union would drive its tanks through Europe like a knife through hot butter. 

To fight this “eventuality,” NATO built a terrorist organization of massive proportions.  The remaining cells of Operation Gladio, one of the greatest disasters of military ignorance in history, are busy today.

We call some of them “Al Qaeda.”

Operation Gladio is the heart of world terrorism, alive and well, and built by NATO, built by the United States and used against America and the world.  Gladio, created to save us from communism, quickly became a terrorist organization itself, murdering political leaders, rigging elections, terror attacks to blame on one group or another.  The “medicine” became the disease.  It is now killing us.

WHERE THE DAMAGE HAS LEFT US, LESS FREE, MAYBE NOT FREE, NOT INDEPENDENT AT ALL

This week, in light of failing relations with Israel over unresolved “Bush era” issues, 9/11, Israel’s role in manipulating America into two illegal wars and the despicable propaganda campaign they have run against the United States in her own press, something unheard of happened.  Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu met with GOP leaders, extracting a promise that they would agree to work with Israel against the interests of the United States.  Yes, we said “against.”  America has no treaties with Israel, no Israeli troops support us but Israel has been caught, time after time, spying on the US, bribing public officials and military leaders and worse, working to keep America under attack.

They are either the worst friend imaginable or something else.  Many are coming to realize that America has been occupied by Israel.  When Netanyahu met with his Republicans it was because President Obama, much like Karzai in Afghanistan, is simply getting sick of them as Karzai is sick of the American occupation of Afghanistan.   There is a reason that dual citizens control Homeland Security, the FBI, the State Department and Department of Defense.  Oh, you didn’t know that most of the key officials of those organizations are Israeli citizens?  The news didn’t tell you?  Well, in an occupied country, the “occupier” controls the news.

THOSE WHO CLAIM TO SAVE US TURN OUT TO BE THE THREAT ITSELF

These organizations are controlled so that any resistance will be crushed immediately.  I am not one to talk about FEMA camps and black helicopters but Jesse Ventura seems to be right.  Our most recent proof is the Yemen bomb scam.  No bombs were found.  There is no Al Qaeda in Yemen, in fact there is no Al Qaeda, no matter how much you hear the word, which means, of course, “toilet.”  Former Homeland Security director, Chertoff, (Israeli) is raking in millions selling scanners which, other than being another humiliation, may well be dangerous.

When is the last time you heard of a bomb being found by TSA (Transportation Security Administration) officers?  The last time a bomb came into the US, the “terrorist” was personally seated on the plane by an airport security official working for an Israeli company.  He was walked around inspections.  Why search anyone at all under circumstances like that?  The same company manages most of America’s airports too.  Have we lost our minds here?  We know who the real terrorists are, they are the people we hire to run our security.  Didn’t read that in the papers? 

Problem living in an occupied country?

BRITAIN AND THE MURDER OF DAVID KELLY

Today, if you read the Daily Mail, the Thames Valley Constabulary, after several years, has decided to open a murder inquiry on the “suicide” of Dr. David Kelly, the expert who told Prime Minister Tony Blair that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.  For years, “backchannel” chatter has been that Kelly’s murder was ordered at the highest levels of government, not just Britain but America as well.  More importantly, Kelly was personally involved in the Israeli/South African nuclear program and its dismantlement.

He was also the signatory for the 3 nuclear weapons that disappeared and he knew Saddam didn’t have them.  The real reason for the attack on Iraq in 2003 was nuclear weapons the “45 minute” nukes, the “ambulance” nukes, that we claimed Saddam had.  Kelly knew better, he arranged for their shipment to Oman and knew British politicians were paid millions to “look the other way” when these bombs disappeared.

Kelly’s murder is one of the thousands of war crimes tied to the phony war on terror.  Every tape released, featuring long dead Osama bin Laden is a war crime as are the very suspicious bombings in Pakistan, the very suspicious Mumbai attack and the 7/7 “incident” in Britain that the “organs of state security” are working so hard to cover up to this day.  In fact, there is a long history of bombings, Madrid, further back, Berlin or those in Italy during the 80s.  All are easily tied to intelligence agencies and, frankly, have been by newspapers, politicians.

Here at home, it was more than CIA agent Valerie Plame who was attacked.  A good friend and former UN Ambassador, a Middle East briefer for President’s Reagan and Bush/Bush, did the same thing as Kelly.  He went to President Bush and revealed that the intelligence that was being presented was false.  He wasn’t killed.  Instead he was arrested, charged with dozens of fanciful counts of working for terrorist organizations.  This was a warning.  If they would go after one of President Reagan’s closest advisors and friends, a strong pro-Zionist and neo-con, anyone could be “gotten rid of.”

Anyone who thinks people weren’t “gotten rid of” isn’t paying attention.

GLADIO, THE LIVING PROOF THERE IS NO AL QAEDA, NO WAR ON TERROR

In order to fight communism, NATO organized, though its intelligence agencies, terrorist capabilities in case Western Europe would fall to the communists.  Hundreds of millions were spent to set up, in every country of Europe, terrorist organizations, bomb making factories in basements, underground organizations, terror cells.  This was done under what was called Operation Gladio.  These terror organizations were used, from time to time, to simulate threats.  They kidnapped officials, blew up trains and cafe’s, they became a real terrorist threat.

The newspapers don’t like reporting this but it is, not only true but extremely well documented.  As Wikipedia has now come under threat, the extensive section of GLADIO will be reproduced in this article.  It should be saved.

Nearly everything we claim the PLO and other organizations were responsible for, including and especially Al Qaeda, has been the work of the GLADIO “stay behind” networks which were never totally broken up after the Cold War.  GLADIO is Al Qaeda.

Everything that is claimed to be Osama bin Laden and the imaginary Taliban training camps, people who have trouble keeping camels alive, was financed by NATO as part of the Cold War and left to take on a life of itself, morphing into a terrorist capability that no one wants to give up, no matter what kind of threat it is capable of.

The long shadow of GLADIO now fuels an industry that has started two wars, controls the world’s opium supplies and has allowed the United States to occupy the Middle East as a “protectorate.”  At the same time, however, the United States itself, though its love affair with treason, terrorism and spying, has, itself, become the real victim of the invisible networks it spent so many millions to build.

————————————————

Operation Gladio

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Emblem of “Gladio”, Italian branch of the NATO “stay-behind” paramilitary organizations. The motto means “In silence I preserve freedom”.

Gladio (Italian for Gladius, the sword is a type of Roman short sword) is a code name denoting the clandestine NATOstay-behind” operation in Italy after World War II, intended to continue anti-communist actions in the event of a Warsaw Pact invasion of Western Europe. Although Gladio specifically refers to the Italian branch of the NATO stay-behind organisations, “Operation Gladio” is used as an informal name for all stay-behind organisations, sometimes called “Super NATO”.[1]

Operating in many NATO and even some neutral countries,[2] Gladio was part of a series of national operations first coordinated by the Clandestine Committee of the Western Union (CCWU), founded in 1948. After the creation of NATO in 1949, the CCWU was integrated into the Clandestine Planning Committee (CPC), founded in 1951 and overseen by SHAPE (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers, Europe), transferred to Belgium after France’s official withdrawal from NATO’s Military Committee in 1966 — which was not followed by the dissolution of the French stay-behind paramilitary movements.

The role of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in sponsoring Gladio and the extent of its activities during the Cold War era, and its relationship to right-wing terrorist attacks perpetrated in Italy during the Years of Lead and other similar clandestine operations is the subject of ongoing debate and investigation. Italy, Switzerland and Belgium have had parliamentary inquiries into the matter.[3]

Contents

[edit] Origins

The origin of Gladio can be traced to the so-called “secret anti-Communist NATO protocols”, which were allegedly protocols committing the secret services of NATO member states to work to prevent Communist parties from coming to power in Western Europe. According to the Italian researcher Mario Coglitore, the protocols required member states to guarantee alignment with the Western block “by any means”. According to a US journalist Arthur Rowse, a secret clause exists in the North Atlantic Treaty requiring candidate countries, before joining NATO, to establish clandestine citizen cadres standing ready to eliminate communist cells during any national emergency. These clandestine cadres were to be controlled by the county’s respective security services.[4]

[edit] General stay-behind structure

Emblem of NATO’s “stay-behind” paramilitary organizations.

After World War II, the UK and the US decided to create “stay-behind” paramilitary organizations, with the official aim of countering a possible Soviet invasion through sabotage and guerrilla warfare behind enemy lines. Arms caches were hidden, escape routes prepared, and loyal members recruited: i.e., mainly hardline anticommunists, including many ex-Nazis or former fascists, whether in Italy or in other European countries.

In Germany, for example, Gladio had as a central focus the Gehlen Org — also involved in ODESSA “ratlines” — named after Reinhard Gehlen who would become West Germany’s first head of intelligence, while the predominantly Italian P2 masonic lodge was composed of many members of the neofascist Italian Social Movement (MSI), including Licio Gelli. Its clandestine “cells” were to stay behind (hence the name) in enemy controlled territory and to act as resistance movements, conducting sabotage, guerrilla warfare and assassinations.

However, Italian Gladio was more far reaching. “A briefing minute of June 1, 1959, reveals Gladio was built around ‘internal subversion’. It was to play ‘a determining role… not only on the general policy level of warfare, but also in the politics of emergency’. In the 1970s, with communist electoral support growing and other leftists looking menacing, the establishment turned to the ‘Strategy of Tension’ … with Gladio eager to be involved.”[5]

CIA director Allen Dulles was one of the key people in instituting Operation Gladio, and most of Gladio’s operations were financed by the CIA.[citation needed] The anti-communist networks, which were present in all of Europe, including in neutral countries like Sweden and Switzerland, were partly funded by the CIA.[6] Some went as far as claiming that Democrazia Cristiana leader Aldo Moro had been the “founder of (Italian) Gladio”.[7] However, whether these allegations are correct or not, his murder in 1978 put an end to the “historic compromise” (sharing of power) attempt between the PCI and the Christian Democrats (DC), thus accomplishing one of the alleged objectives of the strategy of tension.

Operating in all of NATO and even in some neutral countries such as Spain before its 1982 admission to NATO, Gladio was first coordinated by the Clandestine Committee of the Western Union (CCWU), founded in 1948. After the creation of NATO in 1949, the CCWU was integrated into the “Clandestine Planning Committee” (CPC), founded in 1951 and overseen by the SHAPE (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe), transferred to Belgium after France’s official retreat from NATO — which was not followed by the dissolution of the French stay-behind paramilitary movements.

Ganser alleges that:[4]

Next to the CPC, a second secret army command center, labeled Allied Clandestine Committee (ACC), was set up in 1957 on the orders of NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander in Europe (SACEUR). This military structure provided for significant US leverage over the secret stay-behind networks in Western Europe as the SACEUR, throughout NATO’s history, has traditionally been a US General who reports to the Pentagon in Washington and is based in NATO’s Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) in Mons, Belgium.

The ACC’s duties included elaborating on the directives of the network, developing its clandestine capability, and organizing bases in Britain and the United States. In wartime, it was to plan stay-behind operations in conjunction with SHAPE. According to former CIA director William Colby, it was ‘a major program’.

Coordinated by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), {the secret armies} were run by the European military secret services in close cooperation with the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the British foreign secret service Secret Intelligence Service (SIS, also MI6). Trained together with US Green Berets and British Special Air Service (SAS), these clandestine NATO soldiers, armed with underground arms-caches, prepared against a potential Soviet invasion and occupation of Western Europe, as well as the coming to power of communist parties. The clandestine international network covered the European NATO membership, including Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxemburg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, and Turkey, as well as the neutral European countries of Austria, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland.

The existence of these clandestine NATO armies remained a closely guarded secret throughout the Cold War until 1990, when the first branch of the international network was discovered in Italy. It was code-named Gladio, the Latin word for a short double-edged sword [gladius]. While the press said that the NATO secret armies were ‘the best-kept, and most damaging, political-military secret since World War II’, the Italian government, amidst sharp public criticism, promised to close down the secret army. Italy insisted identical clandestine armies had also existed in all other countries of Western Europe.

This allegation proved correct and subsequent research found that in Belgium, the secret NATO army was code-named SDRA8, in Denmark Absalon, in Germany TD BJD, in Greece LOK, in Luxemburg Stay-Behind, in the Netherlands I&O, in Norway ROC, in Portugal Aginter, in Switzerland P26, in Turkey Ozel Harp Dairesi, In Sweden AGAG (Aktions Gruppen Arla Gryning, and in Austria OWSGV. However, the code names of the secret armies in France, Finland and Spain remain unknown.

Upon learning of the discovery, the parliament of the European Union (EU) drafted a resolution sharply criticizing the fact (…) Yet only Italy, Belgium and Switzerland carried out parliamentary investigations, while the administration of President George H. W. Bush refused to comment, being in the midst of preparations for war against Saddam Hussein in the Persian Gulf, and fearing potential damages to the military alliance.

If Gladio was effectively “the best-kept, and most damaging, political-military secret since World War II”,[8] it must be underlined, however, that on several occasions, arms caches were discovered and stay-behind paramilitary organizations officially dissolved – only to be created again. But it was not until the 1990s that the full international scope of the program was disclosed to public knowledge. Giulio Andreotti, the main character of Italy’s post-World War II political life, was described by Aldo Moro to his captors as “too close to NATO”, Moro thus advising them to be wary.

Indeed, before Andreotti’s 1990 acknowledgement of Gladio’s existence, he had “unequivocally” denied it in 1974, and then in 1978 to judges investigating the 1969 Piazza Fontana bombing. And even in 1990, “Testimonies collected by the two men [judges Felice Casson and Carlo Mastelloni investigating the 1972 Peteano fascist car bomb] and by the Commission on Terrorism on Rome, and inquiries by the Guardian, indicate that Gladio was involved in activities which do not square with Andreotti’s account. Links between Gladio, Italian secret services bosses and the notorious P2 masonic lodge are manifold (…) In the year that Andreotti denied Gladio’s existence, the P2 treasurer, General Siro Rosetti, gave a generous account of ‘a secret security structure made up of civilians, parallel to the armed forces’ There are also overlaps between senior Gladio personnel and the committee of military men, Rosa dei Venti (Wind Rose), which tried to stage a coup in 1970.”[5]

[edit] European Parliament resolution concerning Gladio

 

Wikisource has original text related to this article:European Parliament resolution on Gladio

On November 22, 1990, the European Parliament passed a resolution condemning Gladio, requesting full investigations – which have yet to be done – and total dismantlement of these paramilitary structures. In 2005,the first academic examination of Gladio was published by Swiss historian Daniele Ganser. Mr. Ganser, as of 2010, is a Senior Researcher at the Center for Security Studies at the Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, Switzerland. His book, NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe, is a documented study of how Gladio oeprated.

British journalist Philip Willan, who by 2010 writes for the UK Guardian and UK Observer, is the author of the book Puppetmasters: The Political Use of Terrorism in Italy, describing how US intelligence services relationship with a masonic lodge used to prop up Christian Democrat governments , undermining the growing political influence of the Italian Communist Party.

The 1990 European resolution condemned “the existence for 40 years of a clandestine parallel intelligence” as well as “armed operations organization in several Member States of the Community”, which “escaped all democratic controls and has been run by the secret services of the states concerned in collaboration with NATO.”

Denouncing the “danger that such clandestine network may have interfered illegally in the internal political affairs of Member States or may still do so,” especially before the fact that “in certain Member States military secret services (or uncontrolled branches thereof) were involved in serious cases of terrorism and crime,” the Parliament demanded a “a full investigation into the nature, structure, aims and all other aspects of these clandestine organizations or any splinter groups, their use for illegal interference in the internal political affairs of the countries concerned, the problem of terrorism in Europe and the possible collusion of the secret services of Member States or third countries.”

Furthermore, the resolution protested “vigorously at the assumption by certain US military personnel at SHAPE and in NATO of the right to encourage the establishment in Europe of a clandestine intelligence and operation network,” asking “the Member States to dismantle all clandestine military and paramilitary networks” and to “draw up a complete list of organizations active in this field, and at the same time to monitor their links with the respective state intelligence services and their links, if any, with terrorist action groups and/or other illegal practices.” Finally, the Parliament called “on its competent committee to consider holding a hearing in order to clarify the role and impact of the ‘Gladio’ organization and any similar bodies,” and instructed “its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the Council, the Secretary-General of NATO, the governments of the Member States and the United States Government.”

[edit] Allegations

 

 

The first academic examination of Gladio was published in 2005 by Swiss historian Daniele Ganser. Mr. Ganser is currently a Senior Researcher at the Center for Security Studies at the Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, Switzerland. His book, NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe, Gladio has been accused of trying to influence policies through the means of “false flag” operations: a 2000 Italian Parliamentary Commission report from the Olive Tree left-wing coalition concluded that the strategy of tension used by Gladio had been supported by the United States to “stop the PCI (Italian Communist Party), and to a certain degree also the PSI (Italian Socialist Party), from reaching executive power in the country”.

Propaganda Due (also known as P2), a quasi-freemasonic organization, whose existence was discovered in 1981, was said closely linked to Gladio[citation needed].

P2 was outlawed and disbanded in 1981, in the wake of the Banco Ambrosiano scandal, which was linked to the Mafia and to the Vatican Bank. Its Grand Master, Licio Gelli, was involved in most of Italy’s scandals in the last three decades of the 20th century: Banco Ambrosiano’s crash; Tangentopoli, which gave rise to the Mani pulite (“Clean hands”) anticorruption operation in the 1990s; the kidnapping and the murder of Prime Minister Aldo Moro in 1978 – the head of the secret services at the time, accused of negligence, was a piduista (P2 member). Licio Gelli has often said he was a friend of Argentine President Juan Perón.

In any case, some important figures of his circle were discovered to be piduista, such as José López Rega, founder of the infamous anticommunist organization Triple A and provisional president Raúl Alberto Lastiri. Some members of later Jorge Videla’s dictatorship were part of the P2 too, such as Admiral Emilio Massera and General Guillermo Suárez Mason. The Vatican Bank was also accused of funneling covert US funds for the Solidarnosc trade union movement in Poland and the Contras in Nicaragua.[9]

Furthermore, Gladio has been linked to other events, such as Operation Condor[10][improper synthesis?] and the 1969 killing of anticolonialist/independentist Mozambican leader Eduardo Mondlane by Aginter Press, the Portuguese “stay-behind” secret army, headed by Yves Guérin-Sérac – the allegation on Mondlane’s death is disputed, with several sources stating that FRELIMO guerrilla leader Eduardo Mondlane was killed in a struggle for power within FRELIMO. In 1995, Attorney General Giovanni Salvi accused the Italian secret services of having manipulated proofs of the Chilean secret police’s (DINA) involvement in the 1975 terrorist attack on former Chilean Vice-President Bernardo Leighton in Rome. A similar mode of operation can also be recognized in various Cold War events, for example between the June 20, 1973 Ezeiza massacre in Buenos Aires (Argentina), the 1976 Montejurra massacre in Spain and the 1977 Taksim Square massacre in Istanbul (Turkey).

After Giulio Andreotti’s revelations and the disestablishment of Gladio, the last meeting of the “Allied Clandestine Committee” (ACC), was held according to the Italian Prime minister on October 23 and 24, 1990. Despite this, various events have raised concerns about “stay-behind” armies still being in place. In 1996, the Belgian newspaper Le Soir revealed the existence of a racist plan operated by the military intelligence agencies. In 1999, Switzerland was suspected of again creating a clandestine paramilitary structure, allegedly to replace the former P26 and P27 (the Swiss branches of Gladio). Furthermore, in 2005, the Italian press revealed the existence of the Department of Anti-terrorism Strategic Studies (DSSA), accused of being “another Gladio”.

[edit] Gladio’s strategy of tension and internal subversion operations

Further information: Strategy of tension

NATO’s “stay-behind” organizations were never called upon to resist a Soviet invasion, but their structures continued to exist after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Internal subversion and “false flag” operations were explicitly considered by the CIA and stay-behind paramilitaries. According to a November 13, 1990 Reuters cable,[11] “André Moyen – a former member of the Belgian military security service and of the [stay-behind] network – said Gladio was not just anti-Communist but was for fighting subversion in general. He added that his predecessor had given Gladio 142 million francs ($4.6 millions) to buy new radio equipment.”[12] Ganser alleges that on various occasions, stay-behind movements became linked to right-wing terrorism, crime and attempted coups d’état:[4]

“Prudent Precaution or Source of Terror?” the international press pointedly asked when the secret stay-behind armies of NATO were discovered across Western Europe in late 1990. After more than ten years of research, the answer is now clear: both. The overview aboves shows that based on the experiences of World War II, all countries of Western Europe, with the support of NATO, the CIA, and MI6, had set up stay-behind armies as precaution against a potential Soviet invasion. While the safety networks and the integrity of the majority of the secret soldiers should not be criticized in hindsight after the collapse of the Soviet Union, very disturbing questions do arise with respect to reported links to terrorism.

There exist large differences among the European countries, and each case must be analyzed individually in further detail. As of now, the evidence suggests the secret armies in the seven countries, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Luxemburg, Switzerland, Austria, and the Netherlands, focused exclusively on their stay-behind function and were not linked to terrorism. However, links to terrorism have been either confirmed or claimed in the nine countries, Italy, Ireland, Turkey, Germany, France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, and Sweden, demanding further investigation.

According to Daniele Ganser, only Italy, Belgium and Switzerland carried on parliamentary investigations, while the prosecution of various “black terrorists” (terrorismo nero, neofascist terrorism) in Italy was difficult.

A 1990 article from The Guardian featured the following quote from judge Libero Mancuso:[13]

On the eve of the 1980 Bologna bombing anniversary, Liberato [sic] Mancuso, the Bologna judge who had led the investigation and secured the initial convictions [of the Bologna bombers] broke six months of silence: “It is now understood among those engaged in the matter of democratic rights that we are isolated, and the objects of a campaign of aggression. This is what has happened to the commission into the P2, and to the magistrates. The personal risks to us are small in comparison to this offensive of denigration, which attempts to discredit the quest for truth. In Italy there has functioned for some years now a sort of conditioning, a control of our national sovereignty by the P2 – which was literally the master of the secret services, the army and our most delicate organs of state.”

Examples of such alleged terrorist acts include the strategy of tension in Italy, or the Oktoberfest bomb blast of 1980 in Munich.[citation needed] A Gladio official said that “depending on the cases, we would block or encourage far-left or far-right terrorism”.[14][15]

[edit] Gladio operations in NATO countries

[edit] First discovered in Italy

Main article: Gladio in Italy

The Italian NATO stay-behind organization, dubbed “Gladio”, was set up under Minister of Defense (from 1953 to 1958) Paolo Taviani‘s (DC) supervision.[16] However, Gladio’s existence came to public knowledge when Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti revealed it to the Chamber of Deputies on October 24, 1990, although far-right terrorist Vincenzo Vinciguerra had already revealed its existence during his 1984 trial. According to media analyst Edward S. Herman, “both the President of Italy, Francesco Cossiga, and Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti, had been involved in the Gladio organization and coverup…”[17][verification needed]

[edit] Giulio Andreotti’s October 24, 1990 revelations

Prime minister Giulio Andreotti (member of the Christian Democracy, DC) publicly recognized the existence of Gladio on October 24, 1990. Andreotti spoke of a “structure of information, response and safeguard”, with arms caches and reserve officers. He gave to the Commissione Stragi, the parliamentary commission led by senator Giovanni Pellegrino in charge of investigations on bombings committed during the Years Of Lead in Italy, a list of 622 civilians who according to him were part of Gladio.

Andreotti also assured that 127 weapons’ cache had been dismantled, and pretended that Gladio had not been involved in any of the bombings committed from the 1960s to the 1980s (further evidence implicated neofascists linked to Gladio, in particular concerning the 1969 Piazza Fontana bombing, the 1972 Peteano attack by Vincenzo Vinciguerra, the 1980 Bologna massacre in which SISMI officers were condemned for investigation diversion, along with Licio Gelli, head of Propaganda Due masonic lodge, etc.). Andreotti declared that the Italian military services (predecessors of the SISMI) had joined in 1964 the Allied Clandestine Committee created in 1957 by the US, France, Belgium and Greece, and which was in charge of directing Gladio’s operations.[18]

However, Gladio was actually set up under Minister of Defense (from 1953 to 1958) Paolo Taviani‘s supervision.[16] Beside, the list of Gladio members given by Andreotti was incomplete. It didn’t include, for example, Antonio Arconte, who described an organization very different from the one brushed by Giulio Andreotti: an organization closely tied to the SID secret service and the Atlantist strategy.[19][20] According to Andreotti, the stay-behind organisations set up in all of Europe did not come “under broad NATO supervision until 1959.”[21]

[edit] 2000 Parliamentary report: a “strategy of tension”

In 2000, a Parliament Commission report from the “Gruppo Democratici di Sinistra l’Ulivo” concluded that the strategy of tension had been supported by the United States to “stop the PCI, and to a certain degree also the PSI, from reaching executive power in the country“. A 2000 Senate report, stated that “Those massacres, those bombs, those military actions had been organized or promoted or supported by men inside Italian state institutions and, as has been discovered more recently, by men linked to the structures of United States intelligence.” According to The Guardian, “The report [claimed] that US intelligence agents were informed in advance about several rightwing terrorist bombings, including the December 1969 Piazza Fontana bombing in Milan and the Piazza della Loggia bombing in Brescia five years later, but did nothing to alert the Italian authorities or to prevent the attacks from taking place.

It also [alleged] that Pino Rauti [current leader of the MSI Fiamma-Tricolore party], a journalist and founder of the far-right Ordine Nuovo (new order) subversive organisation, received regular funding from a press officer at the US embassy in Rome. ‘So even before the ‘stabilising’ plans that Atlantic circles had prepared for Italy became operational through the bombings, one of the leading members of the subversive right was literally in the pay of the American embassy in Rome,’ the report says.”[22]

[edit] General Maletti’s testimony concerning alleged CIA involvement

General Gianadelio Maletti, commander of the counter-intelligence section of the Italian military intelligence service from 1971 to 1975, alleged in March 2001 during the eight trial for the 1969 Piazza Fontana bombings that the CIA had foreknowledge of the event.[23] According to the Guardian, he said:[24]

…his men had discovered that a rightwing terrorist cell in the Venice region had been supplied with military explosives from Germany. Those explosives may have been obtained with the help of members of the US intelligence community, an indication that the Americans had gone beyond the infiltration and monitoring of extremist groups to instigating acts of violence…

General Maletti told the Italian court that “the CIA, following the directives of its government, wanted to create an Italian nationalism capable of halting what it saw as a slide to the left and, for this purpose, it may have made use of rightwing terrorism,” and continued on by declaring: “I believe this is what happened in other countries as well.” Gianadelio Maletti also said to the court: “Don’t forget that Nixon was in charge and Nixon was a strange man, a very intelligent politician but a man of rather unorthodox initiatives.“[citation needed]

General Maletti himself in the first Piazza Fontana trial received a four year sentence for providing a false passport to one of the accused bombers, this sentence was overturned in 1985.[25] Maletti received, while in exile, a 15-years sentence in 2000 for his role in trying to cover up a 1973 bomb attack in Milan against the Interior minister, Mariano Rumor (DC – 4 killed and 45 injured), but was acquitted on appeals.[26] According to the court, General Maletti knew in advance of the plan of the attacker, Gianfranco Bertoli, allegedly an anarchist but in reality a right-wing activist and a “long-standing SID informant” according to The Guardian, but had deliberately failed to inform the interior minister of it.[24]

Responding to charges made by Maletti in La Repubblica one year earlier, the CIA called the allegation that it was involved in the attacks in Italy “ludicrous.”[27]

[edit] A quick chronology of Italy’s “strategy of tension”

In 1964, Gladio was involved in a silent coup d’état when General Giovanni de Lorenzo in the so-called Piano Solo (“Operation Alone”) forced the Italian Socialists Ministers to leave the government.[28]

According to Avanguardia Nazionale member Vincenzo Vinciguerra: “The December 1969 explosion was supposed to be the detonator which would have convinced the politic and military authorities to declare a state of emergency[29]

In 1970, the failed coup attempt Golpe Borghese gathered, around fascist Junio Valerio Borghese, international terrorist Stefano Delle Chiaie and P2 grand master Licio Gelli.[citation needed]

  • 1972 Gladio meeting

According to The Guardian, “General Geraldo Serravalle, a former head of “Office R”, told the terrorism commission that at a crucial Gladio meeting in 1972, at least half of the upper echelons “had the idea of attacking the communists before an invasion. They were preparing for civil war.” Later, he put it more bluntly: “They were saying this: “Why wait for the invaders when we can make a preemptive attack now on the communists who would support the invader?

The idea is now emerging of a Gladio web made up of semi-autonomous cadres which – although answerable to their secret service masters and ultimately to the NATO-CIA command – could initiate what they regarded as anti-communist operations by themselves, needing only sanction and funds from the existing ‘official’ Gladio column (…) General Nino Lugarese, head of SISMI from 1981-84 testified on the existence of a ‘Super Gladio’ of 800 men responsible for ‘internal intervention’ against domestic political targets.”[5]

  • May 31, 1972 Peteano massacre

Magistrate Felice Casson discovered that “the explosives used in the attack came from one of 139 secret weapons depots of a secret army organized under the code name Operation Gladio”.[17] Neofascist Vincenzo Vinciguerra confessed in 1984 to judge Felice Casson of having carried out the Peteano terrorist attack, in which three policemen died, and for which the Red Brigades (BR) had been blamed before. Vinciguerra explained during his trial how he had been helped by Italian secret services to escape the police and to fly away to Francoist Spain. However, he was abandoned by NATO as soon as he started talking about Gladio, declaring for example during his 1984 trial:

“with the massacre of Peteano and with all those that have followed, the knowledge should now be clear that there existed a real live structure, occult and hidden, with the capacity of giving a strategic direction to the outrages. [This structure] lies within the states itself. There exists in Italy a secret force parallel to the armed forces, composed of civilians and military men, in an anti-Soviet capacity, that is, to organise a resistance on Italian soil against a Russian army… A super-organization which, lacking a Soviet military invasion which might not happen, took up the task, on NATO’s behalf, of preventing a slip to the left in the political balance of the country.

This they did, with the assistance of the official secret services and the political and military forces…” He then said to The Guardian, in 1990: “I say that every single outrage that followed from 1969 fitted into a single, organised matrix… Avanguardia Nazionale, like Ordine Nuovo (the main right-wing terrorist group active during the 1970s), were being mobilised into the battle as part of an anti-communist strategy originating not with organisations deviant from the institutions of power, but from within the state itself, and specifically from within the ambit of the state’s relations within the Atlantic Alliance.”[4][5]

  • November 23, 1973 Bombing of the plane Argo 16

General Geraldo Serravalle, head of Gladio from 1971 to 1974, told a television programme that he now thought the explosion aboard the plane Argo 16 on 23 November 1973 was probably the work of gladiatori who were refusing to hand over their clandestine arms. Until then it was widely believed the sabotage was carried out by Mossad, the Israeli foreign service, in retaliation for the pro-Libyan Italian government’s decision to expel, rather than try, five Arabs who had tried to blow up an Israeli airliner. The Arabs had been spirited out of the country on board the Argo 16.[30]

In 1974, a massacre committed by Ordine Nuovo, during an anti-fascist demonstration in Brescia, kills eight and injures 102. The same year, a bomb in the Rome to Munich train “Italicus Express” kills 12 and injures 48. Also in 1974, Vito Miceli, P2 member, chief of the SIOS (Servizio Informazioni), Army Intelligence’s Service from 1969 and SID‘s head from 1970 to 1974, got arrested on charges of “conspiration against the state” concerning investigations about Rosa dei venti, a state-infiltrated group involved in terrorist acts. During his trial, he revealed the existence of the NATO stay-behind secret army.[citation needed]

  • 1977 Reorganization of Italian secret services following Vito Miceli’s arrest

In 1977, the secret services were thus reorganized in a democratic attempt. With law#801 of 24/10/1977, SID was divided into SISMI (Servizio per le Informazioni e la Sicurezza Militare), SISDE (Servizio per le Informazioni e la Sicurezza Democratica) and CESIS (Comitato Esecutivo per i Servizi di Informazione e Sicurezza). The CESIS was given a coordination role, led by the President of Council.[citation needed]

Prime minister Aldo Moro was murdered in May 1978 by the Second Red Brigades (BR), headed by Mario Moretti, in obscure circumstances. The head of the Italian secret services, accused of negligence, was a P2 member. The so-called “historic compromise” between the Christian-Democracy and the PCI was abandoned:[31] The Italian Government led by Prime Minister Francesco Cossiga (a member of the extreme right faction of Italy’s Christian Democrat party, a pro-NATO atlantist was also suspected of involvement in the killing of Aldo Moro).[citation needed]

“As the conspiracy theorists would have it, Mr. Moro was allowed to be killed either with the acquiescence of people high in Italy’s political establishment, or at their instigation, because of the historic compromise he had made with the Communist Party“[citation needed]

“During his captivity, Aldo Moro wrote several letters to various political figures, including Giulio Andreotti. In October 1990, “a cache of previously unknown letters written by the former Prime Minister, Aldo Moro, just prior to his execution by Red Brigade terrorists in 1978… was discovered in a Milan apartment which had once been used as a Red Brigade hideout. One of those letters made reference to the involvement of both NATO and the CIA in an Italian-based secret service, ‘parallel’ army.”[32] “This safe house had been thoroughly searched at the time by Carlo Alberto Dalla Chiesa, the head of counter-terrorism. How is it that the papers had not been revealed before?” asked The Independent[31] Carlo Alberto Dalla Chiesa was murdered in 1982 (see below).

In May 1978, investigative journalist Mino Pecorelli thought that Aldo Moro’s kidnapping had been organised by a “lucid superpower” and was inspired by the “logic of Yalta“. He painted the figure of General Carlo Alberto Dalla Chiesa as “general Amen,” explaining that it was him that, during Aldo Moro’s kidnap, had informed Interior Minister Francesco Cossiga of the localization of the cave where Moro was detained. In 1978, Pecorelli wrote that Dalla Chiesa was in danger and would be assassinated (Dalla Chiesa was murdered four years later).

After Aldo Moro’s assassination, Mino Pecorelli published some confidential documents, mainly Moro’s letters to his family. In a cryptic article published in May 1978, wrote The Guardian in May 2003, Pecorelli drew a connection between Gladio, NATO’s stay-behind anti-communist organisation (which existence was publicly acknowledged by Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti in October 1990) and Moro’s death. During his interrogation, Aldo Moro had referred to “NATO’s anti-guerrilla activities.”[33] Mino Pecorelli, who was on Licio Gelli‘s list of P2 members discovered in 1980, was assassinated on March 20, 1979. The ammunitions used, a very rare type, where the same as discovered in the Banda della Magliana ‘s weapons stock hidden in the Health Minister’s basement. Pecorelli’s assassination has been thought to be directly related to Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti, who was condemned to 20 years of prison for it in 2002 before having the sentence cancelled by the Supreme Court of Cassation in 2003.[citation needed]

“The makings of the bomb… came from an arsenal used by Gladio… according to a parliamentary commission on terrorism… The suggested link with the Bologna massacre is potentially the most serious of all the accusations levelled against Gladio, and comes just two days after the Italian Prime Minister, Giulio Andreotti, cleared Gladio’s name in a speech to parliament, saying that the secret army did not drift from its formal Nato military brief.”[34]

In November 1995, Neo-Fascists terrorists Valerio Fioravanti and Francesca Mambro, members of the Nuclei Armati Revoluzionari (NAR), were convicted to life imprisonment as executors of the 1980 Bologna massacre. The NAR neofascist group worked in cooperation with the Banda della Magliana, a Mafia-linked gang which took over Rome’s underground in the 1970s and was involved in various political events of the strategy of tension, including the Aldo Moro case, the 1979 assassination of Mino Pecorelli, a journalist who published articles alleging links between Prime minister Giulio Andreotti and the mafia, as well as the assassination of “God’s Banker” Roberto Calvi in 1982. The investigations concerning the Bologna bombing proved Gladio’s direct influence: Licio Gelli, P2′s headmaster, received a sentence for investigation diversion, as well as Francesco Pazienza and SISMI officers Pietro Musumeci and Giuseppe Belmonte.

Avanguardia Nazionale founder Stefano Delle Chiaie, who was involved in the Golpe Borghese in 1970, was also accused of involvement in the Bologna massacre[15][35]

 

 

General Carlo Alberto Dalla Chiesa’s 1982 murder, in Palermo, by Pino Greco, one of the Mafia Godfather Salvatore Riina‘s (aka Toto Riina) favorite hitmen, is allegedly part of the strategy of tension. Alberto Dalla Chiesa had arrested Red Brigades founders Renato Curcio and Alberto Franceschini in September, 1974, and was later charged of investigation concerning Aldo Moro. He had also found Aldo Moro’s letters concerning Gladio.

After the discovery by judge Felice Casson of documents on Gladio in the archives of the Italian military secret service in Rome, Giulio Andreotti, head of Italian government, revealed to the Chamber of deputies the existence of “Operazione Gladio” on October 24, 1990, insisting that Italy has not been the only country with secret “stay-behind” armies. He made clear that “each chief of government had been informed of the existence of Gladio”. Former Socialist Prime Minister Bettino Craxi said that he had not been informed until he was confronted with a document on Gladio signed by himself while he was Prime Minister. Former Prime Minister Giovanni Spadolini (Republican Party), at the time President of the Senate, and former Prime Minister Arnaldo Forlani, at the time secretary of the ruling Christian Democratic Party claimed they remembered nothing. Spadolini stressed that there was a difference between what he knew as former Defence Secretary and what he knew as former Prime Minister.

Only former Prime Minister Francesco Cossiga (DC) confirmed Andreotti’s revelations, explaining that he was even “proud and happy” for his part in setting up Gladio as junior Defence Minister of the Christian Democratic Party. This lit up a political storm, requests were made for Cossiga’s (Italian President since 1985) resignation or impeachment for high treason. He refused to testify to the investigating Senate committee. Cossiga narrowly escaped his impeachment by stepping down on April 1992, three months before his term expired.[36]

  • 1998 David Carrett, officer of the U.S. Navy

David Carrett, officer of the U.S. Navy, was indicted by magistrate Guido Salvini on charge of political and military espionage and his participation to the 1969 Piazza Fontana bombing, among other events. Judge Guido Salvini also opened up a case against Sergio Minetto, Italian official for the US-NATO intelligence network, and pentito Carlo Digilio. La Repubblica underlined that Carlo Rocchi, CIA’s man at Milan, was surprised in 1995 searching for information concerning Operation Gladio, thus demonstrating that all was not over.[29]

1969 Piazza Fontana bombing, which started Italy’s anni di piombo, and the 1974 “Italicus Expressen“ train bombing were also attributed to Gladio operatives. In 1975, Stefano Delle Chiaie met with Pinochet during Franco‘s funeral in Madrid, and would participate afterward in operation Condor, preparing for example the attempted murder of Bernardo Leighton, a Chilean Christian Democrat, or participating in the 1980 ‘Cocaine Coup’ of Luis García Meza Tejada in Bolivia. In 1989, he was arrested in Caracas, Venezuela and extradited to Italy to stand trial for his role in the Piazza Fontana bombing. Despite his reputation, Delle Chiaie was acquitted by the Assize Court in Catanzaro in 1989, along with fellow accused Massimiliano Fachini (as yet no convictions have been made for the attack). According to Avanguardia Nazionale member Vincenzo Vinciguerra: “The December 1969 explosion was supposed to be the detonator which would have convinced the political and military authorities to declare a state of emergency.”[29]

[edit] The DSSA, another Gladio?

In July 2005, the Italian press revealed the existence of the Department of Anti-terrorism Strategic Studies (DSSA), a “parallel police” created by Gaetano Saya and Riccardo Sindoca, two leaders of the National Union of the Police Forces (UNPF), a trade-union present in all the state security forces.

Both said they were former members of Gladio. According to the DSSA website — closed after these revelations — Fabrizio Quattrocchi, murdered in Iraq after being taken hostage, was there “for the DSSA”. According to the Italian investigators, the DSSA was trying to obtain international and national recognition by intelligence agencies, in order to obtain finances for its parallel activities. Furthermore, Il Messaggero, quoted by The Independent, declared that, according to judicial sources, wiretaps suggested DSSA members had been planning to kidnap Cesare Battisti, a former communist activist. “We were seeing the genesis of something similar to the death squads in Argentina” (the AAA groups) the magistrate is reported to have said.[37][38][39][40][41]

[edit] Belgium

Main article: Belgian stay-behind network

After the 1966 retreat of France from NATO, the SHAPE headquarters were displaced to Mons in Belgium. In 1990, following France’s denial of any “stay-behind” French army, Giulio Andreotti publicly said the last Allied Clandestine Committee (ACC) meeting, at which the French branch of Gladio was present, had been on October 23 and 24, 1990, under the presidency of Belgian General Van Calster, director of the Belgian military secret service SGR. In November, Guy Coëme, the Minister of the Defense, acknowledged the existence of a Belgium “stay-behind” army, lifting concerns about a similar implication in terrorist acts as in Italy. The same year, the European Parliament sharply condemned NATO and the United States in a resolution for having manipulated European politics with the stay-behind armies.[28]

New legislation governing intelligence agencies’ missions and methods was passed in 1998, following two government inquiries and the creation of a permanent parliamentary committee in 1991, which was to bring them under the authority of Belgium’s federal agencies. The Commission was created following events in the 1980s, which included the Brabant massacres and the activities of far right group Westland New Post.[42]

[edit] France

In 1947, Interior Minister Edouard Depreux revealed the existence of a secret stay-behind army in France codenamed “Plan Bleu”. The next year, the “Western Union Clandestine Committee” (WUCC) was created to coordinate secret unorthodox warfare. In 1949, the WUCC was integrated into NATO, whose headquarters were established in France, under the name “Clandestine Planning Committee” (CPC). In 1958, NATO founded the Allied Clandestine Committee (ACC) to coordinate secret warfare.[citation needed]

The network was supported with elements from SDECE, and had military support from the 11th Choc regiment. The former director of DGSE, admiral Pierre Lacoste, alleged in a 1992 interview with The Nation, that certain elements from the network were involved with terrorist activities against de Gaulle and his Algerian policy. A section of the 11th Choc regiment split over the 1962 Evian peace accords, and became part of the Organisation armée secrète (OAS), but it is unclear if this also involved members of the French stay-behind network.[43][44]

La Rose des Vents and Arc-en-ciel (“Rainbow”) network were part of Gladio. François de Grossouvre was Gladio’s leader for the region around Lyon in France until his alleged suicide on April 7, 1994. Grossouvre would have asked Constantin Melnik, leader of the French secret services during the Algerian War of Independence (1954–62), to return to activity. He was living in comfortable exile in the US, where he maintained links with the Rand Corporation. Constantin Melnik is alleged to have been involved in the creation in 1952 of the Ordre Souverain du Temple Solaire, an ancestor of the Order of the Solar Temple, created by former A.M.O.R.C. members, in which the SDECE (French former military intelligence agency) was interested.[45]

[edit] Denmark

 

 

The Danish stay-behind army was code-named Absalon, after a Danish archbishop, and led by E.J. Harder. It was hidden in the military secret service Forsvarets Efterretningstjeneste (FE). In 1978, William Colby, former director of the CIA, released his memoirs in which he described the setting-up of stay-behind armies in Scandinavia:[46]

“The situation in each Scandinavian country was different. Norway and Denmark were NATO allies, Sweden held to the neutrality that had taken her through two world wars, and Finland were required to defer in its foreign policy to the Soviet power directly on its borders. Thus, in one set of these countries the governments themselves would build their own stay-behind nets, counting on activating them from exile to carry on the struggle.

These nets had to be co-ordinated with NATO’s plans, their radios had to be hooked to a future exile location, and the specialised equipment had to be secured from CIA and secretly cached in snowy hideouts for later use. In other set of countries, CIA would have to do the job alone or with, at best, “unofficial” local help, since the politics of those governments barred them from collaborating with NATO, and any exposure would arouse immediate protest from the local Communist press, Soviet diplomats and loyal Scandinavians who hoped that neutrality or nonalignment would allow them to slip through a World War III unharmed.”

On November 25, 1990, Danish daily newspaper Berlingske Tidende, quoted by Daniele Ganser (2005), confirmed William Colby’s revelations, by a source named “Q”:

“Colby’s story is absolutely correct. Absalon was created in the early 1950s. Colby was a member of the world spanning laymen Catholic organisation Opus Dei, which, using a modern term, could be called right-wing. Opus Dei played a central role in the setting up of Gladio in the whole of Europe and also in Denmark… The leader of Gladio was Harder who was probably not a Catholic. But there are not many Catholics in Denmark and the basic elements making up the Danish Gladio were former [WW II] resistance people – former prisoners of Vestre Fængsel, Frøslevlejren, Neuengamme and also of the Danish Brigade.”

[edit] Germany

Reinhard Gehlen, Nazi intelligence agent on the East front during the war, turned towards the US after the war, and set up the “Gehlen Organisation,” which used many former Nazi party members for intelligence purposes during the Cold War. But alongside the Gehlen organisation, which became the nucleus of the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND, Federal Intelligence Service), West Germany‘s intelligence agency created in 1956, US intelligence also set up a German stay-behind network parallel (and juxtaposed) to the Gehlen Org (which also had a role in the organisation of the ODESSA network, used to exfiltrate Nazi war criminals). CIA documents released in June 2006 under the 1998 Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act, more than fifteen years after Prime minister Giulio Andreotti’s revelations concerning Gladio, show that the CIA organized “stay-behind” networks of German agents between 1949 and 1955.[47]

One of these networks supported by the CIA was the Technische Dienst (TD, Technical Service) section within the Bund Deutscher Jugend (BDJ, Union of German Youth). The anti-communist BDJ was founded in 1950 by ex-Nazis Erhard Peters and Paul Lüth. The existence of TD came to light, after a speech in the Hesse Landtag by PM Georg August Zinn.[48] During the investigations into BDJ, which started in September 1952, a couple of arms caches were found, including one in the Odenwald region, Hesse.[49] The claim by August Zinn that the BDJ supposedly was in the possession of a list of Social Democracts and Communists to be liquidated in case of a Soviet invasion, including leading figures of the opposition Social Democratic Party[50]) was denied by German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer.[49] The BDJ was outlawed in January 1953.[51][52]

Documents shown to the Italian parliamentary terrorism committee revealed that in the 1970s British and French officials involved in the network visited a training base in Germany built with US money.[50]

In 1976, the secret service BND secretary Heidrun Hofer was arrested after having revealed the secrets of the German stay-behind army to her husband, who was a spy of the KGB.[28]

[edit] The 1980 Oktoberfest bomb blast

Revelations of a witness in the investigation of the Oktoberfest bomb blast of 1980 in Munich lead to the conclusion that the explosives might have come from the German Neo-Nazi Heinz Lembke.[citation needed] In 1981, German police by chance found an arms cache in the Lüneburg Heath, which led to the arrest of Lembke and the discovery of other arms caches in Lower Saxony. A few days later Lembke hanged himself in his prison cell. Lembke had been questioned in Oktoberfest investigation, but the public prosecutors found no evidence that he supplied the explosives for the bombing.[53]

Lembke’s arms caches were supposed to be connected to Gladio by a number of researchers and journalists.[4]

[edit] CIA’s documents released in June 2006

One network included Staff Sergent Heinrich Hoffman and Lieutenant Colonel Hans Rues, and another one, codenamed Kibitz-15, was run by Lieutenant Colonel Walter Kopp, a former Wehrmacht officer, described by his own North American handlers as an “unreconstructed Nazi.”[54] In an April 1953 CIA memo released in June 2006, the CIA headquarters wrote: “The present furore in Western Germany over the resurgence of the Nazi or neo-Nazi groups is a fair example — in miniature — of what we would be faced with.” Therefore some of these networks were dismantled.

These documents stated that the ex-Nazis were a complete failure in intelligence terms. According to Timothy Naftali, a US historian from the University of Virginia who reviewed the CIA documents then released, “The files show time and again that these people were more trouble than they were worth. The unreconstructed Nazis were always out for themselves, and they were using the West’s lack of information about the Soviet Union to exploit it.”[54] The US NARA Archives themselves stated in a 2002 communique, concerning Reinhard Gehlen’s recruiting of former Nazis, that “Besides the troubling moral issues involved, these recruitments opened the West German government, and by extension the United States, to penetration by the Soviet intelligence services.”[55]

Hans Globke, who had worked for Adolf Eichmann in the Jewish Affairs department and helped draft the 1935 Nuremberg laws, became Chancellor Konrad Adenauer‘s national security advisor in the 1960s, and “was the main liaison with the CIA and NATO” according to The Guardian.[54] A March 1958 memo from the German BND agency to the CIA wrote that Adolf Eichmann is “reported to have lived in Argentina under the alias CLEMENS since 1952.” However, the CIA did not pass the information on to the Israeli MOSSAD, as it feared revelations concerning its use of former Nazis for intelligence purposes — Eichmann, who was in charge of the Jewish Affairs department, was abducted by the MOSSAD two years later. Among these information that might have been revealed by Eichmann were the ones concerning Hans Globke, CIA’s liaison in West Germany. At the request of Bonn, the CIA persuaded Life magazine to delete any reference to Globke from Eichmann’s memoirs, which it had bought from his family.[47]

[edit] Norbert Juretzko’s 2004 revelations

In 2004 the German spymaster Norbert Juretzko published a book about his work at the BND. He went into details about recruiting partisans for the German stay-behind network. He was sacked from BND following a secret trial against him, because the BND could not find out the real name of his Russian source “Rübezahl” whom he had recruited. A man with the name he put on file was arrested by the KGB following treason in the BND, but was obviously innocent, his name having been chosen at random from the public phone book by Juretzko.[citation needed]

According to Juretzko, the BND built up its branch of Gladio, but discovered after the fall of the German Democratic Republic that it was 100% known to the Stasi early on. When the network was dismantled, further odd details emerged. One fellow “spymaster” had kept the radio equipment in his cellar at home with his wife doing the engineering test call every 4 months, on the grounds that the equipment was too “valuable” to remain in civilian hands.

Juretzko found out because this spymaster had dismantled his section of the network so quickly, there had been no time for measures such as recovering all caches of supplies.[citation needed] Civilians recruited as stay-behind partisans were equipped with a clandestine shortwave radio with a fixed frequency. It had a keyboard with digital encryption, making use of traditional Morse code obsolete. They had a cache of further equipment for signalling helicopters or submarines to drop special agents who were to stay in the partisan’s homes while mounting sabotage operations against the communists.[citation needed]

[edit] Greece

The aim of British Prime minister Winston Churchill was to prevent the communist-led EAM resistance movement from taking power after the end of World War II. After the suppression of a pro-EAM uprising in April 1944 among the Greek forces in Egypt, a new and firmly reliable unit was formed, the Third Greek Mountain Brigade, which excluded “almost all men with views ranging from moderately conservative to left wing.”[56] After liberation in October 1944, EAM controlled most of the country.

When it organized a demonstration in Athens on December 3, 1944 , members of rightist and pro-royalist paramilitary organizations, covered by “British troops and police with machine guns… posited on the rooftops”, suddenly shot on the crowd, killing 25 protesters (including a six-year-old boy) and wounding 148.[57] This marked the outbreak of the Dekemvriana, which would lead to the Greek Civil War.[citation needed]

When Greece joined NATO in 1952, the country’s special forces, the LOK (Lochoi Oreinōn Katadromōn, i.e. “Mountain Raiding Companies“) were integrated into the European stay-behind network. The CIA and LOK reconfirmed on March 25, 1955 their mutual co-operation in a secret document signed by US General Trascott for the CIA, and Konstantinos Dovas, chief of staff of the Greek military. In addition to preparing for a Soviet invasion, the CIA instructed LOK to prevent a leftist coup. Former CIA agent Philip Agee, who was sharply criticized in the US for having revealed sensitive information, insisted that “paramilitary groups, directed by CIA officers, operated in the sixties throughout Europe [and he stressed that] perhaps no activity of the CIA could be as clearly linked to the possibility of internal subversion.”[58]

The LOK was involved in the Greek military coup d’État on April 21, 1967,[59][not in citation given] which took place one month before the scheduled national elections for which opinion polls predicted an overwhelming victory of the centrist Center Union of George and Andreas Papandreou. Under the command of paratrooper Lieutenant Colonel Costas Aslanides, the LOK took control of the Greek Defence Ministry while Brigadier General Stylianos Pattakos gained control over communication centers, the parliament, the royal palace, and according to detailed lists, arrested over 10,000 people. Phillips Talbot, the US ambassador in Athens, disapproved of the military coup which established the “Regime of the Colonels” (1967–1974), complaining that it represented “a rape of democracy” – to which Jack Maury, the CIA chief of station in Athens, answered: “How can you rape a whore?”.[28][not in citation given]

Arrested and then exiled in Canada and Sweden, Andreas Papandreou later returned to Greece, where he won the 1981 election for Prime minister, forming the first socialist government of Greece’s post-war history. According to his own testimony, he discovered the existence of the secret NATO army, then codenamed “Red Sheepskin”, as acting prime minister in 1984 and had given orders to dissolve it.[citation needed]

Following Giulio Andreotti’s revelations in 1990, the Greek defence minister confirmed that a branch of the network, known as Operation Sheepskin, operated in his country until 1988.[60] The socialist opposition called for a parliamentary investigation into the secret army and its alleged link to terrorism and the 1967 coup d’état. Public order minister Yannis Vassiliadis declared that there was no need to investigate such “fantasies” as “Sheepskin was one of 50 NATO plans which foresaw that when a country was occupied by an enemy there should be an organised resistance. It foresaw arms caches and officers who would form the nucleus of a guerilla war. In other words, it was a nationally justifiable act.”[citation needed]

In December 2005, journalist Kleanthis Grivas published an article in To Proto Thema, a Greek Sunday newspaper, in which he accused “Sheepskin” for the assassination of CIA station chief Richard Welch in Athens in 1975, as well as the assassination of British military attaché Stephen Saunders in 2000. This was denied by the US State Department, who responded that “the Greek terrorist organization ‘17 November‘ was responsible for both assassinations”, and that Grivas’s central piece of evidence had been the Westmoreland Field Manual which the State department, as well as an independent Congressional inquiry have alleged to be a Soviet forgery.[61] The document in question, however, makes no specific mention of Greece, November 17, nor Welch. The State Department also highlighted the fact that, in the case of Richard Welch, “Grivas bizarrely accuses the CIA of playing a role in the assassination of one of its own senior officials” while “Sheepskin” couldn’t have assassinate Stephen Saunders for the simple reason, according to the US government, that “the Greek government stated it dismantled the “stay behind” network in 1988.”[61]

[edit] Cyprus

The 1960 constitution only had provision for a very small professional army of a few hundred men from both Cypriot communities. Following the 1963-64 clashes that led to the collapse of the power sharing between greek and turkish cypriots, the National Guard was created as a conscription greek cypriot army. The officers for the National Guard where almost exclusively Greek nationals, officers of the greek army. LOK units were created in Cyprus modelled on the Greek LOK units, though Cyprus never joined NATO and was at the time a member of the Non-Aligned Movement.

Reporter Makarios Drousiotis[62] has written about Greek officer Dimitris Papapostolou, commander of LOK in Cyprus at the time, conspiring with ex-interior minister Polykarpos Yorkatzis to kill elected president Makarios by attacking his helicopter, and after the failure of that attempt, being involved in the assassination of Yorkatzis. The 15 July 1974 coup d’etat against Makarios was executed by National Guard units, with the attack on the presidential palace perpetrated by 32 Moira Katadromon LOK unit with the help of a tanks reconnaisance unit.[citation needed]

[edit] The Netherlands

A large arms cache was discovered in 1983 near the village Velp. In 1990 the government by means of then-prime-minister Ruud Lubbers was forced to confirm that the arms were related to planning for unorthodox warfare. He insisted that the Dutch organisation was, contrary to the operations in other European countries, totally independent from NATO command, and during wartime occupation would be commanded by the Dutch government in exile. The operating bureaus of the organisation would also move to safety in England or the USA at the first sign of trouble.[citation needed]

In his television show of 22 April 2007 Dutch crime journalist Peter R. De Vries revealed that weapons had been illegally supplied to Gladio well after the network was supposed to have been disbanded.[28]

A Dutch investigative television program revealed on September 9, 2007, that an arms cache that belonged to Gladio was ransacked in the 1980s. The cache was located in a forest near Scheveningen. Some of stolen weapons later turned up, including hand grenades and machine guns, when police officials arrested criminals Sam Klepper and John Mieremet in 1991. The Dutch military intelligence agency, MIVD, feared at that time that the disclosure of the Gladio history of these weapons was politically explosive.[63][64]

[edit] Norway

In 1957, the director of the secret service NIS, Vilhelm Evang, protested strongly against the pro-active intelligence activities at AFNORTH, as described by the chairman of CPC: “[NIS] was extremely worried about activities carried out by officers at Kolsås. This concerned SB, Psywar and Counter Intelligence.” These activities supposedly included the blacklisting of Norwegians. SHAPE denied these allegations. Eventually, the matter was resolved in 1958, after Norway was assured about how stay-behind networks were to be operated.[65][page needed]

In 1978, the police discovered an arms cache and radio equipment at a mountain cabin and arrested Hans Otto Meyer, a businessman accused of being involved in selling illegal alcohol. Meyer claimed that the weapons were supplied by Norwegian intelligence. Rolf Hansen, defense minister at that time, stated the network was not in any way answerable to NATO and had no CIA connection.[66]

[edit] Portugal

Further information: Aginter Press

In 1966, the CIA set up Aginter Press which, under the direction of Captain Yves Guérin-Sérac (who had taken part in the founding of the OAS), ran a secret stay-behind army and trained its members in covert action techniques amounting to terrorism, including bombings, silent assassinations, subversion techniques, clandestine communication and infiltration and colonial warfare.

Aginter Press was suspected of having assassinated General Humberto Delgado (1906–1965), founder of the Portuguese National Liberation Front against Salazar‘s dictatorship (prominent historians and several sources also claim Delgado’s assassination was performed by PIDE operational Rosa Casaco), as well as anti-colonialist leader Amilcar Cabral (1924–1973), founder of the PAIGC (African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde) and Eduardo Mondlane leader of the liberation movement FRELIMO (Frente de Libertação de Moçambique), in 1969 (prominent historians and several sources also claim Cabral’s assassination was performed by indivuduals within Cabral’s guerrilla movemment, the PAIGC, and Mondlane’s death was work of his enemies inside FRELIMO – according to these versions, both assassinations were the result of struggles for power within the independentist movements).[28][67]

[edit] Turkey

Main article: Counter-Guerrilla

Further information: Deep stateErgenekon network, and Jandarma İstihbarat ve Terörle Mücadele

As one of the nations that prompted the Truman Doctrine, Turkey is one of the first countries to participate in Operation Gladio and, some say, the only country where it has not been purged.[68] According to Italian magistrate Felice Casson, the Turkish stay-behind forces are two-pronged: the military “Counter-Guerrilla”, and the civilian “Ergenekon”.[69] An offshoot of the latter organization is currently the subject of a major investigation. Casson says Turkey is home to the most powerful branch of Operation Gladio.[70]

The counter-guerrilla’s existence in Turkey was revealed in 1973 by then prime minister Bülent Ecevit,[71] and he immediately became a target for several assassination plots.

During the ongoing trials since summer of 2008 it has been revealed that the group named Ergenekon is actually consisted of Armed Forces officers and various civilians working to influence the governments of Turkey, either by subversion or direct coup d’etat.[citation needed]

[edit] The United Kingdom

In Great Britain, Prime Minister Winston Churchill created the Special Operations Executive (SOE) in 1940 to assist resistance movements and carry out subversive operations in enemy-held territory across occupied Europe. Guardian reporter David Pallister wrote in December 1990 that a guerrilla network with arms caches had been put in place following the fall of France. It included Brigadier “Mad Mike” Calvert, and was drawn from a special-forces ski battalion of the Scots Guards which was originally intended to fight in Nazi-occupied Finland.[21]

Known as Auxiliary Units, they were headed by Major Colin Gubbins, an expert in guerrilla warfare who would later lead the SOE. The Auxiliary Units were attached to GHQ Home Forces, and concealed within the Home Guard. The units were created in preparation of a possible invasion of the British Isles by the Third Reich. These units were allegedly stood down only in 1944. Several of their members subsequently joined the Special Air Service and saw action in France in late 1944. The units’ existence did not generally become known by the public until the 1990s though a book on the subject was published in 1968.[72] In fiction, Owen Sheers’ Resistance (2008), set in Wales, takes as one of its central characters a member of the Auxiliary Units called to resist a successful German invasion.

After the end of World War II, the stay-behind armies were created with the experience and involvement of former SOE officers.[28] Following Giulio Andreotti’s October 1990 revelations, General Sir John Hackett (1910–1997), former commander-in-chief of the British Army on the Rhine, declared on November 16, 1990 that a contingency plan involving “stay behind and resistance in depth” was drawn up after the war. The same week, Sir Anthony Farrar-Hockley (1924–2006), former commander-in-chief of NATO’s Forces in Northern Europe from 1979 to 1982, declared to The Guardian that a secret arms network was established in Britain after the war.[50]

General John Hackett had written in 1978 a novel, The Third World War: August 1985, which was a fictionalized scenario of a Soviet Army invasion of West Germany in 1985. The novel was followed in 1982 by The Third World War: The Untold Story, which elaborated on the original. Farrar-Hockley had aroused controversy in 1983 when he became involved in trying to organise a campaign for a new Home Guard against eventual Soviet invasion.[73]

Gladio membership included mostly ex-servicemen but also followers of Oswald Mosley‘s pre-war fascist movement.[citation needed] Among the 200,000+ Polish ex-servicemen in the UK after the end of World War II, unable to return home for fear of communist repression, were conspiratorial groups maintaining combat readiness ready to fight for a free Poland should the Warsaw Pact attack western Europe. The ‘Pogon‘ organisation, linked to the Polish Government-in-Exile held regular paramilitary exercises until the 1970s; many of its members were associated with the Polish scouting movement in the UK which had a strong paramilitary flavour. Links with ‘Stay-behind’ networks are strongly suspected.[citation needed]

[edit] General Serravalle’s revelations

General Gerardo Serravalle, who commanded the Italian Gladio from 1971 to 1974, related that “in the 1970s the members of the CPC [Coordination and Planning Committee] were the officers responsible for the secret structures of Great Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, Luxemburg, the Netherlands and Italy. These representatives of the secret structures met every year in one of the capitals… At the stay-behind meetings representatives of the CIA were always present. They had no voting rights and were from the CIA headquarters of the capital in which the meeting took place… members of the US Forces Europe Command were present, also without voting rights. “.[74] Next to the CPC a second secret command post was created in 1957, the Allied Clandestine Committee (ACC). According to the Belgian Parliamentary Committee on Gladio, the ACC was “responsible for coordinating the ‘Stay-behind’ networks in Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Holland, Norway, United Kingdom and the United States”. During peacetime, the activities of the ACC “included elaborating the directives for the network, developing its clandestine capability and organising bases in Britain and the United States.

In wartime, it was to plan stay-behind operations in conjunction with SHAPE; organisers were to activate clandestine bases and organise operations from there”.[75] General Serravale declared to the Commissione Stragi headed by senator Giovanni Pellegrino that the Italian Gladio members trained at a military base in Britain.[50] Documents shown to the committee also revealed that British and French officials members of Gladio had visited in the 1970s a training base in Germany built with US money.[50]

[edit] The Guardian’s November 1990 revelations concerning plans under Margaret Thatcher

The Guardian reported on November 5, 1990, that there had been a “secret attempt to revive elements of a parallel post-war plan relating to overseas operations” in the “early days of Mrs Thatcher‘s Conservative leadership”. According to the British newspaper, “a group of former intelligence officers, inspired by the wartime Special Operations Executive, attempted to set up a secret unit as a kind of armed MI6 cell.

Those behind the scheme included Airey Neave, Mrs Thatcher’s close adviser who was killed in a terrorist attack in 1979, and George Kennedy Young, a former deputy chief of the Secret Intelligence Service, MI6.” The newspaper stated that Thatcher had been “initially enthusiastic but dropped the idea after the scandal surrounding the attack by the French secret service on the Greenpeace ship, Rainbow Warrior, in New Zealand in 1985.”[59] The Swiss branch, P-26, as well as Italian Gladio, had trained in the UK in the early 1970s.[59[76]

[edit] Parallel stay-behind operations in non-NATO countries

[edit] Austria

In Austria, the first secret stay-behind army was exposed in 1947. It had been set up by far-right Soucek and Rössner, who both insisted during their trial that “they were carrying out the secret operation with the full knowledge and support of the US and British occupying powers.” Sentenced to death, they were then pardoned under mysterious circumstances by President Körner (1951–1957).

Franz Olah set up a new secret army codenamed Österreichischer Wander-Sport-und Geselligkeitsverein (OWSGV, literally “Austrian hiking, sports and society club”), with the cooperation of MI6 and the CIA. He later explained that “we bought cars under this name. We installed communication centres in several regions of Austria”, confirming that “special units were trained in the use of weapons and plastic explosives”. He precised that “there must have been a couple of thousand people working for us… Only very, very highly positioned politicians and some members of the union knew about it”.

In 1965, the police forces discovered a stay-behind arms cache in an old mine close to Windisch-Bleiberg and forced the British authorities to hand over a list with the location of 33 other caches in Austria.[28]

In 1990, when secret “stay-behind” armies were discovered all around Europe, the Austrian government said that no secret army had existed in the country. However, six years later, the Boston Globe revealed the existence of a secret CIA arms caches in Austria.

Austrian President Thomas Klestil and Chancellor Franz Vranitzky insisted that they had known nothing of the existence of the secret army and demanded that the US launch a full-scale investigation into the violation of Austria’s neutrality, which was denied by President Bill Clinton. State Department spokesman Nicholas Burns – appointed in August 2001 by President George Bush as the US Permanent Representative to the Atlantic treaty organization, where, as ambassador to NATO, he headed the combined State-Defense Department United States Mission to NATO and coordinated the NATO response to the September 11, 2001 attacks – insisted: “The aim was noble, the aim was correct, to try to help Austria if it was under occupation. What went wrong is that successive Washington administrations simply decided not to talk to the Austrian government about it.”[4]

[edit] Finland

In 1944, the Swedes worked with Finnish Intelligence to set up a stay-behind network of agents within Finland to keep track of post-war activities in that country. While this network was allegedly never put in place, Finnish codes, SIGINT equipment and documents were brought to Sweden and apparently exploited until the 1980s[77]

In 1945, Interior Minister Yrjö Leino exposed a secret stay-behind army which was closed down (so called Weapons Cache Case). This operation was organized by Finnish general staff officers (without foreign help) in 1944 to hide weapons in order to sustain a large-scale guerilla warfare in the event the Soviet Union tried to occupy Finland in the aftermath of the Continuation War. See also Operation Stella Polaris.

In 1991, the Swedish media claimed that a secret stay-behind army had existed in neutral Finland with an exile base in Stockholm. Finnish Defence Minister Elisabeth Rehn called the revelations “a fairy tale”, adding cautiously “or at least an incredible story, of which I know nothing.”.[28] However, in his memoirs, former CIA director William Colby described the setting-up of stay-behind armies in Scandinavian countries, including Finland, with or without the assistance of local governments, to prepare for a Soviet invasion.[46]

[edit] Spain

Main article: Montejurra Incidents

Several events prior to Spain’s 1982 membership in NATO have also been tied to Gladio: In May 1976, a year after Franco‘s death, two left-wing Carlist members were shot down by far-right terrorists, among whom Gladio operative Stefano Delle Chiaie and members of the Argentine Anticommunist Alliance (Triple A), demonstrating connections between Gladio and the South American “Dirty War“. This incident became known as the Montejurra massacre.[78]

According to a report by the Italian CESIS (Executive Committee for Intelligence and Security Services), Carlo Cicuttini (who took part in the 1972 Peteano bombing in Italy alongside Vincenzo Vinciguerra), participated in the 1977 Massacre of Atocha in Madrid, killing five people (including several lawyers), members of the Workers’ Commissions trade-unions closely linked with the Spanish Communist Party. Cicuttini was naturalized Spanish and exiled in Spain since 1972 (date of the Peteano bombing)[79]

Following Andreotti’s 1990 revelations, Adolfo Suárez, Spain’s first democratically elected Prime minister after Franco’s death, denied ever having heard of Gladio.[80] President of the Spanish government in 1981-82, during the transition to democracy, Calvo Sotelo stated that Spain had not been informed of Gladio when it entered NATO. Asked about Gladio’s relations to Franquist Spain, he said that such a network was not necessary under Franco, since “the regime itself was Gladio.”[81]

According to General Fausto Fortunato, head of Italian SISMI from 1971 to 1974, France and the US had backed Spain’s entrance to Gladio, but Italy would have opposed its veto to it. Following Andreotti’s revelations, however, Narcís Serra, Spanish Minister of Defense, opened up an investigation concerning Spain’s links to Gladio.[82][83] Furthermore, Canarias 7 newspaper revealed, quoting former Gladio agent Alberto Volo, who had a role in the revelations of the existence of the network in 1990, that a Gladio meeting had been organized in August 1991 in the Gran Canaria island.[84]

Alberto Vollo also declared that as a Gladio operative, he had received trainings in Maspalomas, in the Gran Canaria island between the 1960s and the 1970s.[85] El País daily also revealed that the Gladio organization was suspected of having used former NASA installations in Maspalomas, in the Gran Canaria island, in the 1970s.[86]

André Moyen, former Belgian secret agent, also declared that Gladio had operated in Spain.[87] He said that Gladio had bases in Madrid, Barcelona, San Sebastián and the Canarias islands.

[edit] Sweden

In 1951, CIA agent William Colby, based at the CIA station in Stockholm, supported the training of stay-behind armies in neutral Sweden and Finland and in the NATO members Norway and Denmark. In 1953, the police arrested right winger Otto Hallberg and discovered the preparations for the Swedish stay-behind army. Hallberg was set free and charges against him were dropped.[28]

[edit] Switzerland

Main article: Projekt-26

In Switzerland, a secret army named P26 was discovered, by coincidence months before Giulio Andreotti’s October 1990 revelations. After the “secret files scandal” (Fichenaffäre), Swiss parliamentaries started investigating the Defense Department in the summer of 1990. According to Felix Würsten of the ETH Zurich, “P26 was not directly involved in the network of NATO’s secret armies but it had close contact to MI6.”[88] Daniele Ganser (ETH Zurich) wrote in the Intelligence and National Security review that “following the discovery of the stay-behind armies across Western Europe in late 1990, Swiss and international security researchers found themselves confronted with two clear-cut questions: Did Switzerland also operate a secret stay-behind army?

And if yes, was it part of NATO’s stay-behind network? The answer to the first question is clearly yes… The answer to the second question remains disputed…”[89]

Swiss Major Hans von Dach published in 1958 Der totale Widerstand, Kleinkriegsanleitung für jedermann (“Total Resistance,” Bienne, 1958) concerning guerrilla warfare, a book of 180 pages about passive and active resistance to a foreign invasion, including detailed instructions on sabotage, clandestinity, methods to dissimulate weapons, struggle against police moles, etc.[90]

In 1990, Colonel Herbert Alboth, a former commander of the Swiss secret stay-behind army P26 declared in a confidential letter to the Defence Department that he was willing to reveal “the whole truth”. He was later found in his house, stabbed with his own military bayonet. The detailed parliamentary report on the Swiss secret army was presented to the public on November 17, 1990.[28] According to The Guardian, “P26 was backed by P27, a private foreign intelligence agency funded partly by the government, and by a special unit of Swiss army intelligence which had built up files on nearly 8,000 “suspect persons” including “leftists”, “bill stickers”, “Jehovah’s witnesses“, people with “abnormal tendencies” and anti-nuclear demonstrators. On November 14, the Swiss government hurriedly dissolved P26 — the head of which, it emerged, had been paid £100,000 a year.”[59]

In 1991, a report by Swiss magistrate Pierre Cornu was released by the Swiss defence ministry. It said that P26 was without “political or legal legitimacy”, and described the group’s collaboration with British secret services as “intense”. “Unknown to the Swiss government, British officials signed agreements with the organisation, called P26, to provide training in combat, communications, and sabotage. The latest agreement was signed in 1987… P26 cadres participated regularly in training exercises in Britain… British advisers — possibly from the SAS — visited secret training establishments in Switzerland.” P26 was led by Efrem Cattelan, known to British intelligence.[76]

In a 2005 conference presenting Daniele Ganser’s research on Gladio, Hans Senn, General Chief of Staff of the Swiss Army between 1977 and 1980, explained how he was informed of the existence of a secret organisation in the middle of his term of office. According to him, it already became clear in 1980 in the wake of the Schilling/Bachmann affair that there was also a secret group in Switzerland. But former MP, Helmut Hubacher, President of the Social Democratic Party from 1975 to 1990, declared that although it had been known that “special services” existed within the army, as a politician he never at any time could have known that the secret army P26 was behind this. Hubacher pointed out that the President of the parliamentary investigation into P26 (PUK-EMD), the right-wing politician from Appenzell and member of the Council of States for that Canton, Carlo Schmid, had suffered “like a dog” during the commission’s investigations.

Carlo Schmid declared to the press: “I was shocked that something like that is at all possible,” and said to the press he was glad to leave the “conspirational atmosphere” which had weighted upon him like a “black shadow” during the investigations.[91] Hubacher found it especially disturbing that, apart from its official mandate of organizing resistance in case of a Soviet invasion, P26 had also a mandate to become active should the left succeed in achieving a parliamentary majority.[88]

[edit] FOIA requests and US State Department’s 2006 communiqué

Three Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests have been filed to the CIA, which has rejected them with the Glomar response: “The CIA can neither confirm nor deny the existence or non-existence of records responsive to your request.” One request was filed by the National Security Archive in 1991; another by the Italian Senate commission headed by Senator Giovanni Pellegrino in 1995 concerning Gladio and Aldo Moro‘s murder; the last one in 1996, by Oliver Rathkolb, of Vienna university, for the Austrian government, concerning the secret stay-behind armies after a discovery of an arms-cache.[28]

Furthermore, the US State Department published a communiqué in January 2006 which, while confirming the existence of stay-behind armies, in general, and the presence of the “Gladio” stay-behind unit in Italy, in particular, with the purpose of aiding resistance in the event of Soviet aggression directed Westward, from the Warsaw Pact, dismissed claims of any United States ordered, supported, or authorized skullduggery by stay-behind units. In fact, it claims that, on the contrary, the accusations of US-sponsored “false flag” operations are rehashed former Soviet disinformation based on documents that the Soviets themselves forged; specifically the researchers are alleged to have been influenced by the Westmoreland Field Manual, whose forged nature was confirmed by former KGB operatives, following the end of the Cold War.

However since then counter sources from within gladio and the CIA have admitted its authenticity. The alleged Soviet-authored forgery, disseminated in the 1970s, explicitly formulated the need for a “strategy of tension” involving violent attacks blamed on radical left-wing groups in order to convince allied governments of the need for counter-action. It also rejected a Communist Greek journalist’s allegations made in December 2005 (See above).[61]

[edit] Politicians on Gladio

Whilst the existence of a “stay-behind” organization such as Gladio was disputed, prior to its confirmation by Giulio Andreotti[citation needed], with some skeptics describing it as a conspiracy theory, several high ranking politicians in NATO countries have made statements appearing to confirm the existence of something like what is described:

  • Former Italian prime minister Giulio Andreotti (“Gladio had been necessary during the days of the Cold War but, that in view of the collapse of the East Bloc, Italy would suggest to NATO that the organisation was no longer necessary.”)[citation needed]

  • Former French minister of defense Jean-Pierre Chevènement (“a structure did exist, set up at the beginning of the 1950s, to enable communications with a government that might have fled abroad in the event of the country being occupied.”).[citation needed]

  • Former Greek defence minister, Yannis Varvitsiotis (“local commandos and the CIA set up a branch of the network in 1955 to organise guerrilla resistance to any communist invader”)[citation needed]

As noted above, the US has now acknowledged the existence of Operation Gladio.[citation needed]

[edit] External links

  • BBC 2 Gladio – 1992 three-part Documentary Video

  • BBC 2 Gladio – 1992 tree part Documentary Video

[edit] Books

[edit] Films

[edit] Gladio in Fiction

A precise analogue of Operation Gladio was described in the 1949 fiction novel “An Affair of State” by Pat Frank.[92] In Frank’s version, U.S. State Dept officers recruit a stay-behind network in Hungary to fight an insurgency against the Soviet Union after the Soviet Union launches an attack on and captures Western Europe.

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  1. ^ Çelik, Serdar (February/March 1994). “Turkey’s Killing Machine: The Contra-Guerrilla Force”. Kurdistan Report 17. http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/017.html. Retrieved 2008-09-20.  quoting Bülent Ecevit from “a newspaper interview” (in Turkish). Milliyet. 1990-11-28. “Özel Harp Dairesinin nerede bulunduğunu sordum ‘Amerikan Askerî Yardım Heyetiyle aynı binada’ yanıtını aldım.”

  2. ^ Haberman, Clyde (1990-11-16). “EVOLUTION IN EUROPE; Italy Discloses Its Web Of Cold War Guerrillas”. New York Times. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE5D61031F935A25752C1A966958260&sec=&spon=&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink. Retrieved 2008-10-11. “Germany, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece and Luxembourg have all acknowledged that they maintained Gladio-style networks to prepare guerrilla fighters to leap into action in the event of a Warsaw Pact invasion. Many worked under the code name Stay Behind. Greece called its operation Red Sheepskin.
    News reports in recent days assert that similar programs have also existed in Britain, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Austria, Turkey and Denmark, and even in neutral countries like Switzerland and Sweden.”

  3. ^ Belgian parliamentary report concerning the stay-behind network, named “Enquête parlementaire sur l’existence en Belgique d’un réseau de renseignements clandestin international” or “Parlementair onderzoek met betrekking tot het bestaan in België van een clandestien internationaal inlichtingenetwerk” pg. 17-22

  4. ^ a b c d e f Ganser, Daniele. “Terrorism in Western Europe: An Approach to NATO’s Secret Stay-Behind ArmiesPDF (162 KB),” Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, South Orange NJ, Winter/Spring 2005, Vol. 6, No. 1.

  5. ^ a b c d Vulliamy, Ed (1990-12-05). “Secret agents, freemasons, fascists… and a top-level campaign of political ‘destabilisation’”. The Guardian. http://www.cambridgeclarion.org/press_cuttings/vinciguerra.p2.etc_graun_5dec1990.html.

  6. ^ Fitchett, Joseph. (1990-11-13) “Paris Says it Joined NATO ‘Resistance’,” International Herald Tribune

  7. ^ Duraud, Bernard (2005-10-07). “La critique – Récit d’un brigadiste” (in French). L’Humanité. http://www.humanite.fr/2005-10-07_International_La-critique-Recit-d-un-brigadiste.

  8. ^ O’Shaughnessy, Hugh. “Gladio: Europe’s Secret Networks,” The Observer, 18 November 1990.

  9. ^ “Gelli arrest is another chapter in Vatican bank scandal”. American Atheists. 1998-09-16. http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/vatican2.htm. Retrieved February 2006.

  10. ^ See for ex. links between Italian neofascist terrorist Stefano delle Chiaie, whom was protected by the Italian SISMI, and the DINA; including assassination attempts on Bernardo Leighton, Carlos Altamirano, Andrés Pascal Allende (Salvador Allende‘s nephew), etc. Delle Chiaie also worked with Argentine death-squad Triple A and Bolivian dictator Hugo Banzer. Las relaciones secretas entre Pinochet, Franco y la P2 , Conspiración para matar, Sergio Sorin, February 4, 1999

  11. ^ “Secret Cold-War Network Group Hid Arms, Belgian Member Says”. Brussels: Reuters. 1990-11-13.

  12. ^ Pedrick, Clare; Lardner, George Jr (1990-11-14). “CIA Organized Secret Army in Western Europe”. Washington Post. http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost/access/8457082.html?dids=8457082:8457082&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=NOV+14%2C+1990&author=Pedrick%2C+Clare%3B+Lardner%2C+George+Jr&pub=The+Washington+Post&desc=CIA+Organized+Secret+Army+in+Western+Europe&pqatl=google. Retrieved 2008-07-31.

  13. ^ Vulliamy, Ed (1990-08-03). “Grieving Bologna looks back in anger on bombing”. The Guardian.

  14. ^ Patrice, Claude (1990-11-07). “ITALIE : face aux interrogations de l’opinion M. Andreotti lève le voile sur le passé d’une structure armée parallèle patronnée par l’OTAN et la CIA” (in French). Le Monde. http://www.lemonde.fr/cgi-bin/ACHATS/506729.html.

  15. ^ a b Gardais, Pierre (1990-11-29). “Le chef du gouvernement italien a dû reconnaître son existence” (in French). L’Humanité. http://www.humanite.fr/1990-11-29_Articles_-Le-chef-du-gouvernement-italien-a-du-reconnaitre-son-existence. Retrieved 2008-08-21. “Selon les cas, on excitait ou en empêchait le terrorisme d’extrême gauche ou d’extrême droite” [dead link] (English translation)

  16. ^ a b Willan, Philip. “Paolo Emilio Taviani“, The Guardian, June 21, 2001. (Obituary.)

  17. ^ a b Herman, Edward S (June 1991). “Hiding Western Terror”. Nation: 21–22.

  18. ^ Barbera, Myriam. “Gladio: et la France?,” L’Humanité, November 10, 1990 (French).

  19. ^ “Caso Moro. Morire di Gladio” (in Italian). La Voce della Campania. January 2005. http://www.lavocedellevoci.it/inchieste1.php?id=32.

  20. ^ Gladio e caso Moro: Arconte su morte Ferraro, “La Nuova Sardegna” (Italian)

  21. ^ a b Pallister, David. “How M16 and SAS Join In,” The Guardian, December 5, 1990

  22. ^ Willan, Philip. “US ‘supported anti-left terror in Italy’“, The Guardian, June 24, 2000.

  23. ^ CIA knew, but didn’t stop bombings in Italy – report. CBC

  24. ^ a b Willan, Philip. Terrorists ‘helped by CIA’ to stop rise of left in Italy, The Guardian, March 26, 2001.

  25. ^ “Protest marches as the Milan bomb outrage five go free”. The Guardian. 1985-08-03.

  26. ^ “Neo-fascists Cleared of 1973 Bomb Attack for Second Time”. ANSA. 2004-12-01.

  27. ^ “CIA rejects accusation of involvement in bombings in Italy”. AFP. 2000-08-04.

  28. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Chronology, Secret Warfare: Operation Gladio and NATO’s Stay-Behind Armies, ETH Zurich

  29. ^ a b c “Strage di Piazza Fontana spunta un agente USA”. La Repubblica. 1998-02-11. http://www.repubblica.it/online/fatti/fontana/fontana/fontana.html. Retrieved 2006-02-02.  (With original documents, including juridical sentences and the report of the Italian Commission on Terrorism (Italian)

  30. ^ Richards, Charles (1990-12-01). “Gladio is still opening wounds”. The Independent: p. 12. http://www.cambridgeclarion.org/press_cuttings/gladio.parliamentary.committee_indep_1dec1990.html. Retrieved 2008-07-30.

  31. ^ a b Charles Richards & Simon Jones, “Skeletons start emerging from Europe’s closet,” The Independent, November 16, 1990, quoted in (Statewatch 1991).

  32. ^ Agnew, Paddy. “Report of NATO-sponsored secret army shocks Italy,” The Irish Times, on November 15, 1990 pg. 8. Quoted by (Statewatch 1991).

  33. ^ Willan, Philip. “Moro’s ghost haunts political life“, The Guardian, May 9, 2003.

  34. ^ Vulliamy, Ed. The Guardian, January 16, 1991. Quoted by (Statewatch 1991).

  35. ^ Translated from Bologna massacre Association of Victims Italian website Original page (Italian)

  36. ^ Ganser, Daniele (2005-04-07). “The Secret Side of International Relations: An approach to NATO’s stay-behind armies in Western Europe” (PDF). Political Studies Association Annual Conference. http://www.psa.ac.uk/journals/pdf/5/2005/Ganser.pdf. Retrieved 2009-06-27.

  37. ^ “Italy probes ‘parallel police’”. BBC News. July 1, 2005. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4640247.stm. Retrieved 2008-07-30.

  38. ^ Philips, John (2005-07-05). “Up to 200 Italian police ‘ran parallel anti-terror force’”. The Independent. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20050705/ai_n14681859. Retrieved 2008-07-30. [dead link]

  39. ^ Selvatici, Franca (2005-07-02). “Macché Gladio bis, le autorità sapevano Gaetano Saya si difende” (in Italian). La Repubblica. http://www.repubblica.it/2005/g/sezioni/cronaca/polipala/nogladio/nogladio.html.  (Google translation available)

  40. ^ Ceccarelli, Filippo (2005-07-03). “Gladio, P2, falangisti l’Italia che sogna il golpe” (in Italian). La Repubblica. http://www.repubblica.it/2005/g/sezioni/cronaca/polipala/sognigolpe/sognigolpe.html.

  41. ^ Imarisio, Marco (2005-07-03). “Così reclutavano: «Facciamo un’altra Gladio»” (in Italian). Corriere della Sera. http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Cronache/2005/07_Luglio/02/imarisio.shtml.

  42. ^ Official site of the Belgian Permanent Committee for the Control of Intelligence Services See “history” section in the “Presentation” part.

  43. ^ Kwitny, Jonathan (1992-04-06). “The C.I.A.’s Secret Armies in Europe”. The Nation: pp. 446–447. http://www.thenation.com/archive/detail/9203303730.  Quoted in Ganser’s “Terrorism in Western Europe”.

  44. ^ Cogan, Charles (2007). “‘Stay-Behind’ in France: Much ado about nothing?”. Journal of Strategic Studies 30 (6): 937–954. doi:10.1080/01402390701676493.

  45. ^ Daeninckx, Didier. “Du Temple Solaire au réseau Gladio, en passant par Politica Hermetica…,” February 27, 2002.

  46. ^ a b Colby, William. “A Scandinavian Spy,” Chapter 3. (Former CIA director ‘s memoirs.)

  47. ^ a b Lee, Christopher. CIA Ties With Ex-Nazis Shown, Washington Post, June 7, 2006.

  48. ^ “Alleged Secret Organization”. The Times. 1952-10-09.

  49. ^ a b “‘Partisans’ in Germany”. The Times. 1952-10-11.

  50. ^ a b c d e Norton-Taylor, Richard and David Gow. Secret Italian Unit,” The Guardian, November 17, 1990

  51. ^ “Ban In Hesse On Youth Union”. The Times. 1953-01-10.

  52. ^ “Further Ban On Union Of German Youth”. The Times. 1953-01-15.

  53. ^ “Police say suspect committed suicide”. United Press International. 1981-11-01.

  54. ^ a b c Why Israel’s capture of Eichmann caused panic at the CIA, The Guardian, June 8, 2006

  55. ^ Opening of CIA Records under Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act, May 8, 2002 NARA communique (English)

  56. ^ Peter Murtagh, The Rape of Greece. The King, the Colonels, and the Resistance (London, Simon & Schuster, 1994), p.29, quoted by Daniele Ganser (2005), p.213

  57. ^ Ganser (2005), pp.213-214 (his quote)

  58. ^ Philip Agee and Louis Wolf, Dirty Work: The CIA in Western Europe (Secaucus: Lyle Stuart Inc., 1978), p.154 (quoted by Daniele Ganser (2005) p.216

  59. ^ a b c d Richard Norton-Taylor, “The Gladio File: did fear of communism throw West into the arms of terrorists?“, in The Guardian, December 5, 1990

  60. ^NATO’s secret network ‘also operated in France’“, The Guardian, November 14, 1990, pg.6

  61. ^ a b c “Misinformation about “Gladio/Stay Behind” Networks Resurfaces”. United States Department of State. http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2006/Jan/20-127177.html.

  62. ^ http://www.makarios.eu/cgibin/hweb?-A=3664,printer.html&-V=makarios

  63. ^ “‘MIVD verzwijgt wapenvondst in onderwereld’”. Nu.nl. 2007-09-09. http://www.nu.nl/news/1228111/13/%27MIVD_verzwijgt_wapenvondst_in_onderwereld%27.html. Retrieved 2007-09-09.

  64. ^ “GLADIO IN NEDERLAND”. http://reporter.kro.nl/uitzendingen/2007/0909_gladio_in_nederland/intro.aspx. Retrieved 2007-09-09.

  65. ^ Olav Riste (1999). The Norwegian Intelligence Service: 1945-1970. Routledge. ISBN 0714649007.

  66. ^ “Secret Anti-Communist Network Exposed in Norway in 1978″. Associated Press. 1990-11-14.

  67. ^ (Ganser 2005, p. 119) Quotes Joao Paulo Guerra, “Gladio actuou em Portugal“, in O Jornal, 16 November 1990 and Stuart Christie, Stefano delle Chiaie, London, 1984, p.30.

  68. ^ Turkone, Mumtaz’er (2008-07-05). “Only a coup prevented?”. Today’s Zaman. Archived from the original on 2008-08-01. http://web.archive.org/web/20080801140514/http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=146630. Retrieved 2008-11-15. “It was known that Turkey also had a similar organization but it was only the Turkish counter-guerilla group that rode out this purging process intact.”

  69. ^ Kilic, Ecevit (2008-04-28). “İtalyan Gladiosu’nu çözen savcı: En etkili Gladio sizde” (in Turkish). Sabah. http://arsiv.sabah.com.tr/2008/04/28/haber,B9DE249697B646F0939528BF8FA2BE4C.html. Retrieved 2008-11-15. “Türkiye’nin ise ‘Özel Harp Dairesi’, halk arasındaki adıyla ‘kontrgerilla.’ Yapının iki unsuru vardı; askeri görevliler ve siviller. Sivillerden oluşan yapının adı ise ‘Ergenekon’. 1990′lı yılların başında batı ülkeleri, Gladio’nun faaliyetlerine son verdi. Sorumluları yargılandı. Türkiye hariç.”

  70. ^ “Gölbaşı cephanesi İtalyan savcıyı haklı çıkardı” (in Turkish). Zaman. 2009-01-09. http://www.zaman.com.tr/haber.do?haberno=801635. Retrieved 2009-01-09.

  71. ^ Üstel, Aziz (2008-07-14). “Savcı, Ergenekon’u Kenan Evren’e sormalı asıl!” (in Turkish). Star Gazete. http://www.stargazete.com/gazete/yazar/savci-ergenekon-u-kenan-evren-e-sormali-asil-113287.htm. Retrieved 2008-10-21. “Türkiye’deki gizli ordunun adı kontr gerilladır.”

  72. ^ David Lampe, The Last Ditch: Britain’s Resistance Plans against the Nazis Cassell 1968 ISBN 0-304-92519-5

  73. ^ Dan van der Vat. “Obituary: General Sir Anthony Farrar-Hockley,” Guardian. 15 March 2006

  74. ^ Gerardo Serravalle, Gladio (Rome: Edizione Associate, ISBN 88-267-0145-8, 1991), p.78-79 (Italian)

  75. ^ Belgian Parliamentary Commission of Enquiry into Gladio, quoted by Daniele Ganser (2005)

  76. ^ a b Norton-Taylor, Richard. UK trained secret Swiss force” in The Guardian, September 20, 1991, pg.7.

  77. ^ C.G.McKay, Bengt Beckman, Swedish Signal Intelligence, Frank Cass Publishers, 2002, p202

  78. ^ Crimes of Montejurra (Good Google translation)

  79. ^ Un informe oficial italiano implica en el crimen de Atocha al ‘ultra’ Cicuttini, relacionado con Gladio, El País, December 2, 1990 (Spanish)

  80. ^ Suárez afirma que en su etapa de presidente nunca se habló de la red Gladio, El País, November 18, 1990 (Spanish)

  81. ^ Calvo Sotelo asegura que España no fue informada, cuando entró en la OTAN, de la existencia de Gladio, El País, November 21, 1990 (Spanish)

  82. ^ Italia vetó la entrada de España en Gladio, según un ex jefe del espionaje italiano, El País, November 17, 1990 (Spanish)

  83. ^ Serra ordena indagar sobre la red Gladio en España, El País, November 16, 1990 (Spanish)

  84. ^ La ‘red Gladio’ continúa operando, según el ex agente Alberto Volo, El País, August 19, 1991 (Spanish)

  85. ^ El secretario de la OTAN elude precisar si España tuvo relación con la red Gladio, El País, November 24, 1990 (Spanish)

  86. ^ Indicios de que la red Gladio utilizó una vieja estación de la NASA en Gran Canaria, El País, November 26, 1990 (Spanish)

  87. ^ La red secreta de la OTAN operaba en España, según un ex agente belga, El País, November 14, 1990

  88. ^ a b The Dark Side of the West, Conference “Nato Secret Armies and P26,” ETH Zurich, 2005. Published 10 February 2005. Retrieved February 7, 2007.

  89. ^ Ganser, Daniele. “The British Secret Service in Neutral Switzerland: An Unfinished Debate on NATO’s Cold War Stay-behind Armies“, published by the Intelligence and National Security review, vol.20, n°4, December 2005, pp.553-580 ISSN 0268–4527 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              0268–4527      end_of_the_skype_highlighting print 1743–9019 online.

  90. ^ Major Hans von Dach, 1958. Der totale Widerstand…; Total Resistance reed. Paladin Press, 1992 ISBN 978-0-87364-021-3.

  91. ^ “Schwarzer Schatten” (in German). Der Spiegel 50: 194b-200a. 1990-12-10. http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-13502168.html. Retrieved 2008-10-28. [verification needed]

  92. ^ Pat Frank. An Affair of State. J. B. Lippincott & Co. 1949

[edit] Bibliography

Angelo Paratico “Gli assassini del karma” Robin editore, Roma, 2003

Posted in USAComments Off on GLADIO, HOW WE TERRORIZE OURSELVES

ELECTIONS PUT PRO-ZIONIST NEO-CONS BACK ON TOP

NOVANEWS

November 14, 2010by Debbie Menon  

Exemplifying these new developments is the rapid-fire rise of Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), a deeply religious Orthodox Jew and pro-Israeli “neo-conservative” hard-liner who is expected to be named House majority leader in the forthcoming GOP-controlled Congress.

 

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va)
By Michael Collins Piper

The Republican Party’s takeover of the House of Representatives in the recent election also ushers in a consolidation of pro-Israeli political influence over Congress unlike ever before. Then, too—not coincidentally—it heralds a new era in which secret campaign contributions by big-money interests are now holding sway in an unprecedented way.

Exemplifying these new developments is the rapid-fire rise of Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), a deeply religious Orthodox Jew and pro-Israeli “neo-conservative” hard-liner who is expected to be named House majority leader in the forthcoming GOP-controlled Congress.

Although the majority leader post is officially the No. 2 slot in the House of Representatives, the truth is, Cantor will hold tremendous behind-the-scenes power in the Republican caucus—greater than even Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio), who is slated to become speaker of the House (and with whom Cantor has never been on the best of terms).

A new conservative political action group and think tank

A new conservative political action group and think tank
Cantor’s particular influence stems from his control—along with another pro-Israeli hardliner, former Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.)—of a secretive and well-funded political action committee, the American Action Network (AAN), run by Cantor’s close advisor and former chief of staff, Rob Collins.
Cantor’s AAN operation is believed to have raised up to $25 million this past year and spent at least $16 million in waging independent expenditures on behalf of Cantor-approved Republican candidates in the  recent election.

On Oct. 25 even The Washington Post was moved to describe AAN as “mysterious” and described Collins as one of “a small circle of operatives with the coveted expertise of actually running such secretive organizations.”

Collins himself has said, “I have a weird gift for raising money.” 

That gift has given new power to Cantor, who played a major part though AAN in orchestrating the GOP victory, bankrolled by well-heeled contributors whose names are not required to be revealed to the Federal Election Commission.

It is no coincidence that two other, similar fundraising ventures— American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS, both run by former George W. Bush operative Karl Rove—share offices with Cantor’s  AAN. Ellen Miler of the Sunlight Foundation said the massive spending by such groups in the 2010 elections is the “how-to” for the 2012 election.

“It’s how to use corporate money, how to use secret money, to buy elections,” she said. “It’s going to be no holds barred.”

While most members of Congress generally rely on campaign contributions from within their own districts, examination of Cantor’s reported contributions indicate that his political fortunes have relied extensively on a great deal of money supplied by Jewish contributors from across the country.

Cantor is able to tap into those same sources to fund his AAN operation on behalf of pro-Israel Republicans. So, Cantor’s access to tens of millions of dollars in secret cash contributions makes this young congressman particularly influential, today and in the future.

The influx of so many new GOP “conservatives” elected with Cantor’s help will also expand the influence of the Republican Study Committee—of which Cantor is a member—which is composed of more than a hundred GOP congressmen, all of whom are vociferous allies of the Jewish lobby.

The RSC’s executive director, Paul Teller—who described himself to TheWashington Post as the RSC’s “token Jew”—formerly served on the staff of Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.). Pence once described how every time the subject of Israel was mentioned on the House floor, he rushed there to hear what was being said. Now Pence is reportedly hoping to parlay his peculiar devotion to Israel into a 2012 presidential campaign.

The Republican victory also brings control of at least two key House committees into the hands of pro-Israeli lawmakers.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee’s new chair is Cuban-born Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. She has long been one of the loudest advocates for Israel in Washington. Upon her election to Congress in 1988 and for years afterward, she was touted as “the first woman of Hispanic origin elected to the House,” but then the truth came out: Ros-Lehtinen was the granddaughter of Sephardic Jews from Turkey who migrated to Cuba.

Slated to chair the Homeland Security Committee is Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) who—although an Irish Catholic who attended the University of Notre Dame —is a boisterous voice for Israeli interests.

Abroad, the consequences of the GOP victory are being noted in the context of Israel’s concerns. In Israel, Danny Danon, a hardliner in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud Party, expressed delight: “The huge influx of newly elected representatives and senators to Washington includes dozens of strong friends of Israel who will put the brakes on the consistently dubious, sometimes dangerous policies of President Obama these past two years.”

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia’s former ambassador to the United States, Prince Turki al-Faisal, slated to become Saudi foreign minister, warned in a speech in Washington following the election that he foresees a return of the “neo-conservative philosophy” and that the election “will give more fodder for these warmongers to pursue their favorite exercise, war-making.”

The Arab diplomat bluntly declared that “neo-con advisors, American conservatives and Zionist extremists” have promoted policies that “continually throw a wrench into the progress of peace.” 

He said that “particularly in the Congress, the bipartisan support for Israel has been enormous; it’s not just Republicans. My concern is really with the people who speak up for a more aggressive type of policy, as espoused by neo-conservatives. They will interpret these elections as, if you like, a return to what they would consider to be their view on foreign policy in general and . . . particularly on the Middle East.”

Michael Collins Piper is a journalist specializing in media critique. He is the author of The High Priests of War, The New Jerusalem, Dirty Secrets, The Judas Goats, The Golem, Target Traficant and My First Days in the White House. All are available at American Free Press (AFP).

AFP Columnist Mike Piper Discusses Zionist Media and Role Alternative Media Can Play in Fighting Bias

 

 
YouTube – Veterans Today

 

 

Posted in USAComments Off on ELECTIONS PUT PRO-ZIONIST NEO-CONS BACK ON TOP

DID BIBI NAZIYAHU WIN THE MIDTERMS?

NOVANEWS

DID BIBI NETANYAHU WIN THE MIDTERMS?

November 14, 2010

by Debbie Menon

The Republican Congress isn’t even in office yet and already it’s screwing up the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

BY JAMES TRAUB
Foreign Policy
Rep. Eric Cantor

As a general rule, American politicians do not rally to the side of foreign leaders when those leaders directly confront the president of the United States. I don’t, for example, recall liberal Democrats cheering on French President Jacques Chirac when he defied President George W. Bush on Iraq, even though they thought he was right. Siding with France would have seemed unpatriotic — and, of course, stupid.

The American people, and thus their political leaders, will instinctively line up behind the president in the face of a direct challenge from abroad. Unless the country in question is Israel.

Witness the events of recent days: Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, seems to have decided that it’s open season on Barack Obama. In his speech this week in New Orleans before the general assembly of the Jewish Federations of North America, Netanyahu not only repeated his longstanding view that Iran will curb its nuclear program only in the face of a credible threat of military action, but added — gratuitously, and with questionable accuracy — that the regime had stopped trying to build a bomb only in 2003, when it feared an attack by President-You-Know-Who.

This was, of course, only a prelude to the melodrama of the week, in which Israel’s Interior Ministry announced that it had approved plans to build 1,000 new homes in the Har Homa settlement of East Jerusalem — a blatant provocation both to the Palestinians, who view the area as part of a future Palestinian state, and to Obama, who has implored the Netanyahu government to freeze settlement construction as a necessary good-faith gesture toward the Palestinians.

When Obama gently demurred that “this kind of activity is never helpful when it comes to peace negotiations,” Netanyahu’s office shot back, “Jerusalem is not a settlement; Jerusalem is the capital of the State of Israel” — an assertion almost universally disputed, since Israel seized East Jerusalem, which had not been included in its mandated territory, after the 1967 war. Netanyahu later waved off the controversy as “overblown.”

Netanyahu appears to have been thinking, “I can tell Obama where to stick it, because now he’s not only unpopular in Israel, but also weakened at home.” It is widely believed in Israel that Netanyahu’s close aides have been demeaning Obama to the Israeli public through an orchestrated whispering campaign and that this accounts in part for Obama’s dismal poll ratings there. And he and his Likud party have longstanding ties to the Republican Party, which shares Likud’s faith in free markets, its deep suspicion toward most Arab regimes, and its low regard for the Palestinian sense of grievance.

Conservative evangelicals, an important GOP constituency, also tend to be passionately pro-Israel. Thus after the new settlement flare-up, Daniel C. Kurtzer, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel, told the New York Times that with the Republicans now in the ascendant, Netanyahu “feels that he’s got a freer hand here.”

I called the office of Rep. Eric Cantor, the Republican whip and the leading GOP voice on Israel, to ask whether he felt this was so. Cantor has, among other things, suggested that aid to Israel be removed from the foreign-assistance budget so that his party could zero out funding to unfriendly countries while sparing Israel. Cantor was unavailable to talk, but I was sent remarks he had just made on talk radio-host Don Imus’s Imus in the Morning: “I don’t understand how the president wants to push our best ally in the Middle East into a posture of thinking that we’re not going to back their security.” Cantor said that “it is very controversial” to “slam our ally, Israel,” adding that “most Americans understand that Israel’s security is synonymous with America’s security.”

Actually, it’s extraordinary to think that any country’s security can be “synonymous” with that of the United States, though of course even this assumes that Netanyahu’s definition of Israel’s security is right, while that of, say, former prime ministers Ehud Olmert and Ariel Sharon, or aspiring prime minister Tzipi Livni, is wrong. Or is Cantor saying that Americans should automatically accept Israel’s own definition of its security?

The United States doesn’t automatically accept even Britain’s definition of its own security. Whichever it is, the Israel-is-always-right wing of the Republican Party is in a much more powerful position today than it was two weeks ago, and Netanyahu would have every reason to believe that the GOP has his back. So much for those who say that the election had no effect on the conduct of foreign affairs.

Netanyahu has played this game of triangulation before, and not successfully. The last time he was prime minister, from 1996 to 1999, he courted Republican leaders and the Christian right as a counterweight to Bill Clinton. But Clinton cornered him by convening peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians at the Wye Plantation in late 1998. Such was Clinton’s popularity in Israel that Netanyahu feared that an intransigent stance at Wye would lead to the collapse of his coalition government. This episode gave rise to the idea that Netanyahu understood that he could not permit a breach with Washington.

James Traub is a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine and author of, most recently, The Freedom Agenda. “Terms of Engagement,” his column for ForeignPolicy.com, runs weekly.

 

Related Posts: 

Rep. Eric Cantor Tells Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu

Rep. Eric Cantor on Obama’s Israel Policy – Fox Business Video

 

 

Posted in USAComments Off on DID BIBI NAZIYAHU WIN THE MIDTERMS?

INDIA: HOLLOWNESS EXPOSED!

NOVANEWS

November 14, 2010

by Raja Mujtaba

By Air Commodore (Retd) Khalid Iqbal

As the euphoric dust is settling down, it is easy to ascertain the extent to which the recent Obama-Singh summit has exposed Indian weakness. Budding major powers export aeroplanes and high end technologies, rather than importing; they Bangalore-away lowly errands rather than taking pride in running such routines. Above all, socio-economic well being of a common Indian has been bartered away for few aeroplanes, war machines, vague promises and piped dreams.

Lame duck president has no surety of delivering on the promises which he has made. Anti-outsourcing legislation of America is all set to incrementally choke-out the Indian Silicon valley bonanza. India will be paying for 50,000 American jobs, while over 440 million hungry Indians, including 50% children would continue to be undernourished. Growth of Indian aviation industry has been put on hold for 3-4 decades.

India needs to strengthen the indicators that are essential for becoming a credible power. For this, India needs deeper cooperation from the United States. Recent MDG summit at the UN has clearly brought out the embedded weaknesses of India. States with such low socio-economic indicators are not poised to rise above mediocre level. Nor could a majority of an overly poor rural population of Indians, living under US$ 2 per day offer a sparkling market, as the Americans tend to miscalculate.

Rise to super or major power level status is a process of evolution, involving economic elevation coupled with social well-being of a common man, military victories, technological independence and acceptance of elevated posture by other states. India fulfills none of these prerequisite. No country has ever been able to get itself catapulted to the club of major powers, solely by riding the shoulders of another superpower.

Obama’s crumbling down to pressure to save the otherwise failing summit by announcing support for India’s permanent entry into of UNSC was indeed a diplomatic faux pas; promising something over which America does not have a handle. As in case of Japan, key to India’s UNSC pipedream lies with China. And China is quite chary of any UNSC reform that boosts the global status of countries to its south and to its east, that is India and Japan.

After Obama’s UNSC offer, the State Department’s top career diplomat, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, William Burns, said in New Delhi that the road to Council reform would be arduous. “This is bound to be a very difficult process and it’s bound to take a significant amount of time,” he said.

The US began to support Germany and Japan for permanent seats in the Security Council in the early 1990s; later on support for Germany fizzled out, presumably on pressure from other European countries. And, time and again, Japan has seen its hopes ruined.

UN reform bids are thwarted by regional suspicions, geopolitical brokerages, and a complex power calculus. Actual “reform is not going to be easy, for both practical and political reasons”, says Michael Doyle, a former UN official. Doyle says there are “extensive and demanding processes of reforming the UN club,”… “Many countries, in particular some of the original permanent members, don’t want to dilute their power in this way, …it takes not only avoiding any veto by one of the Council’s permanent members, but a two-thirds vote by the full Council and approval of the General Assembly… That alone is a considerable bar to clear… But perhaps even more daunting are the political hurdles”.

While speaking to the joint session of the Indian parliament, Obama said that as part of seeking an “efficient, effective, credible and legitimate United Nations, in the years ahead, I look forward to a reformed United Nations Security Council that includes India as a permanent member….with increased power comes increased responsibility,” and he urged India and other aspiring Security Council members to ensure that “the UN body is effective, its resolutions are implemented and enforced”.  

Surely while saying this Obama must have recalled that UN resolutions on Kashmir are yet to be implemented. Unfortunately, Obama chose to reward a state which is defiant of UN resolutions, much like his predecessor who gifted ‘Agreement 123’, to a non-NPT signatory, guilty of vertical and horizontal proliferation in South Asia.

While prudently sidestepping the symbolic anti-Pakistan landmines laid by Indian tour planners, President Obama told a gathering of Indian students in a matter of fact manner that “Pakistan is strategically important and that India had the most to gain from a stable Pakistan”. He urged India to redouble peace efforts with Pakistan.

Indeed Obama gave a clear message to the Indian leadership that New Delhi has no other option but to enter into dialogue with Islamabad and resolve the outstanding issues, including Kashmir.

India is wrongly perceived as an emerging vital market for the USA, because its protectionist trading environment makes it difficult for Americans to do business in India; chances of India opening up its retail and financial services markets to American investment appear remote.

America has recently had the bitter taste of India’s insidious mind set. Through its ‘Civil Liability for the Nuclear Damages Bill, 2010,’ Indians have effectively blocked the entry of American firms into Indian nuclear business. Ironically, the beneficiaries of ‘Agreement 123’ are Russian and French firms.

America had been pressing upon India to formally disown its dangerous ‘Cold Start Doctrine’ that is fueling tensions between India and Pakistan and hindering the American war effort in Afghanistan. Of late, there have been a series of statements including one from the Indian army chief, distancing from the dangerous doctrine.

President Obama has once again repeated that the Indian role in Afghanistan should be focused on construction activities. So option of formal deployment of Indian military in Afghanistan stands ruled out .India’s much touted claim of spending $1.2 billion is an inflated figure. Most of this expenditure has been on Indian contractor companies. The ring road built by India is in disarray, other buildings are over priced and exhibit slapdash workmanship, akin to the erstwhile Commonwealth Village.

Undue American pampering in the past has indeed converted India into a problem child of South Asia. It has actually starting behaving like a Kangaroo super power; it tends to copy American symbolism and dialect while dealing with its neighbours. India has disputes with all its bordering countries; and it is usurper in most of these discords.

Yet once again, American calculus is faulty; premium placed on India is unrealistically inflated. Indian government would once again avail the opportunity and accrue short term benefits. Long-time sufferer is a common rural Indian, destined to live in poor social security and food insecurity environment for an indefinite time. For quite some time, stability of this region is likely to stay hostage to reinforced Indian arrogance.

Posted in WorldComments Off on INDIA: HOLLOWNESS EXPOSED!

WHO SPEAKS UP FOR HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS

NOVANEWS

November 13, 2010

by Gordon Duff   

camp survivors

 

 

WHAT WOULD THE REAL CAMP SURVIVORS TELL US?

AS MANY AS 90% OF THOSE CLAIMING TO BE HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS MAY BE FRAUDS

By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

Last week, 17 men were arrested in New York for defrauding Germany out of $42 million in payments to phony holocaust survivors.  Tens of thousands of American Jews had filed for pensions from Germany claiming to be concentration camp survivors.  All swore they had been in the camps, told stories about gas chambers, human skin lampshades and such but not a single one had been in a camp at all.  The state of Israel claims to have, alive today, nearly one million holocaust survivors.

As many as 90% of these may well be, not only frauds but many could easily be former concentration camp guards themselves, far more likely than surviving death camps.  What better place to hide than Israel?

With numbers of camp survivors going up each year, we tend to forget we are talking about death camps.  There were few survivors and most of them died immediately after the war.  Those alive were found dying and couldn’t be saved, and most of them weren’t Jews but rather Russians, Gypsies, Communists, trade unionists and anti-Fascists.

Look at the numbers.  There were only 5.3 million Jews listed as living in Europe, outside the USSR, in 1940.  In a rough average, 12 death camps, filled to the brim with gas chambers and crematoriums ran 24 hours a day for 1000 days.  Some are said, in testimony of literally thousands, to have killed from 17,000 to 20,000 per day.  Lets use the figure, 10,000 per day times 12 camps times 1000 days.

Where do a million survivors come from?  I can see a thousand, ten thousand but not 30,000 and certainly not the 15 million necessary to justify the current number of claimed survivors according to typical actuarial tables for healthy adults of the period, those who were not starved and tortured for years.  Look at Vietnam veterans.  Only 700,000 of 2.9 million survive 35 years after the war.  Something is wrong here.

STOLEN VALOR

There are laws in the United States that punish people who wear military medals they didn’t earn or claim other such honors.  When veterans discover someone claiming falsely to have served in war, that individual is arrested but also publicly humiliated.  They are hunted down like dogs.

There are concentration camp survivors living in America, people who suffered incomprehensibly at the hands of the Nazis.  However, there are also, in America we now know, tens of thousands or more who claim falsely to be of the heroic numbers from that period and numbers inside Israel that are unimaginable.  Why are these people not punished?

As a Vietnam veteran, I share a common problem with others.  For 4 decades, I met veteran after veteran, many were children when the war ended, but each claims some honor tied to military service based on a movie or television show.  I have met, over the years, hundreds of such individuals, many at meetings of veterans organizations.  I don’t find it horrible or destructive but it is disturbing and I won’t even remotely begin comparing service in Vietnam with the experience of a death camp.

LAST WEEK

Last week, authorities announced that those who had wrongly filed for benefits had been fooled somehow.  I can see fooling someone as to whether they had seen a televisions show or not but there is only one American I can think of who imagined he had been in a death camp who hadn’t and that was President Ronald Reagan and he only claimed to have visited.  Reagan’s error was based on dementia, not profit or gain.  Now it seems, not only do we have tens of thousands of people who have a single false memory, they seem to remember years of horror, incredible detail and all of it is utterly false.  There is no comparison, not with Reagan, not with Vietnam veterans, not with anyone.

Reagan’s error, despite the respect he is held in and his obvious illness, was been used to defame him countless times.  His error was not only honest but done in the context of human feeling.  How many of the others are lying, not only for financial gain but for something less wholesome?

Why then, in the name of all that is holy, did the authorities and news media immediately write this off as tens of thousands of cases of minor lapses in judgement rather than one of the most horrible moral crimes of all time?

There is no greater disrespect for a holocaust victim than this.

REVISIONISTS AND DENIERS 

Two thousand people in Europe are in prison today for questioning some part, no matter how minor, of the holocaust.  The official story of the holocaust is a compendium of testimony of several hundred thousand people as there was little physical evidence left at the end of the war.  Some facilities were reconstructed based on testimony, for historical perspective but in general, it is believed that the Germans destroyed all evidence of death camps and mass graves when they learned they were losing the war.

Thousands of those who find this explanation unsatisfactory and had chosen to disagree, some noted historians, some scientists and some simple troublemakers and activists, have been imprisoned.  At the trials, holocaust victims claimed that such questioning harmed them irreparably.  However, not one holocaust victim has ever spoken up about the endless numbers of phony holocaust victims who besmirch them every day and have for nearly 65 years.  Why is that?

One thing the revisionists claim is that almost every story from the holocaust, including notable books and even world famous holocaust survivors are, in actuality, the worst phonies of all.  The analogy of the “phony veteran” is applicable here.  After each war, endless numbers of those, who for reasons legitimate or not, felt their contribution to the war effort was less than honorable or noteworthy, claim accomplishments they  are undeserving of.  It is also known that combat veterans are seldom seen on bar stools at service organizations talking about heroic exploits.

In fact, as Americans are learning more and more each day, combat veterans have great difficulty surviving coming home and are often homeless, incarcerated and commit suicide in huge numbers.  It would be easy to extrapolate the same for holocaust survivors.  There is no greater potential cause of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in the history of mankind than the concentration camps of World War 2.  Not only would survivors kill themselves out of guilt, most would suffer greatly shortened lifespans.  This has been amazingly well documented.

This being the case, only a few hundred holocaust survivors could be alive today, not the one million living in Israel.

HONESTY AND TRUTH

Anyone imprisoned wrongly, anyone whose family was killed or whose assets were seized illegally, should be compensated.  Anyone wrongly claiming to be part of a group they are not, one this unique in the history of mankind, deserves punishment.  Why is this not done?  Why is there no normal social pressure to “out” these people and defend the honor of holocaust survivors?

Has anyone ever asked a real holocaust survivor what it is like to see phonies continually on television talking about the holocaust?  Do they forgive?  We will never know, as it seems nobody cares about real holocaust survivors.  The holocaust is brought up when Israel bombs a school or asks for foreign aid but as for the people themselves, these misuses of the suffering of some cheapen human misery and the human condition.

NEVER AGAIN, WHAT DOES IT REALLY MEAN?

If one child was taken away, died in a gas chamber, typhus, shot, it doesn’t matter, one life, this is a holocaust.  If it was done because of race, the crime is doubly evil in nature.   The lesson of “never again” was meant to be a lesson for all mankind to treat every single life with the same honor and respect, not to use the suffering of some as an excuse for financial crime, self delusion or outrageous acts of aggression.

Instead, the holocaust has become theatre, a stage for two sides to debate, to play, to “lawyer” the world to death.  Some feel they should fight the holocaust because it has become a tool of evil.  Some defend it because it is a tool of evil also but they believe the world is evil and only evil men are meant to survive.

Picture the death of a single child.  Then go to the trial of a “holocaust denier.”  Who is evil?  Who is good?  Do any of them ever think of the single child or only how it died, who signed what or how many Palestinian children could be murdered just like that child, in that child’s name perhaps?

THE REAL WAR

Why ask the question if 6 million Jews died?  It is equally possible that 6 million Germans died in the Ukraine and Europe, not soldiers, not in air raids, but in a holocaust type extinction.  This is not talked of but it happened.  All of us, Jews, Germans, the west, all of us, were silent when Josef Stalin killed twice that number or more.  It started before the war and continued after.  The human suffering caused by Stalin was immeasurable but is never spoken of, barely touched on except by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and now his books are banned.  They fail to conform to popular mythology.

There was nothing pure about the real war as there is nothing pure about wars today.  The myths we may or may not make up to protect some are never really to protect anyone.  The weak and vulnerable are never protected, only the powerful.  This is how the powerful become such and remain that way.  We are such liars.

Nobody ever cared about the holocaust survivors only what using their suffering would bring in honor and riches.  Is this the truth?  Is this the partial truth?  Has anyone asked the hard questions, the real questions?  Isn’t it time that all the survivors got together?  Some voice is needed, a voice that can say “never again’ with authority. 

But..”never again”…what?

Posted in USAComments Off on WHO SPEAKS UP FOR HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS

THE TORTURERS REVISITED

NOVANEWS

November 13, 2010by Paul J. Balles

BUSH’S AXIS OF EVIL WAR

  

The Trial is a novel by Franz Kafka, first published in 1925. One of Kafka’s best-known works, it tells the story of a man arrested and prosecuted by a remote, inaccessible authority, with the nature of his crime never revealed either to him or the reader.

The theme developed a familiar ring to it following the imprisonment of “enemy combatants” in Guantanamo.  Echoes of such places come from another Kafka story, “In the Penal Colony”, where everyone is guilty simply because they’re there. If they weren’t guilty, they wouldn’t be there. 

This was the kind of assumption made by the torturers at Abu Ghraib or the jailers in secret CIA prisons around the world or the guards at Guantanamo.  You can be sentenced without trial or defence.

Abu Ghraib prison guard showing off his tattoo

“In the Penal Colony” describes the last use of an elaborate torture and execution device that carves the sentence of the condemned prisoner on his skin in a script before letting him die, all in the course of twelve hours.

“It’s a remarkable piece of apparatus,” says the officer “In the Penal Colony” to the explorer and surveyed with a certain air of admiration of the apparatus which was after all quite familiar to him.

“In any case, the condemned man looked so like a submissive dog that one might have thought he could be left to run free on the surrounding hills and would only need to be whistled for when the execution was due to begin,” says the story’s narrator”

One can easily imagine the jailers at Abu Ghraib making such psycho comments as they attached electric wires to their prisoners’ fingers or forcing a prisoner to remain nude while dogs attacked him. 

That was when cell phones and camcorders made it possible to record the sick psychotic joys of torturing for jailers or their remote commandants.

As for commandants, G W Bush recalls in his memoir that when the CIA asked him whether they could proceed with waterboarding of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the alleged plotter of the 9/11 attacks, Bush replied “Damn right,” reported The Washington Post.

It’s Kafkaesque to imagine this scenario in Guantanamo as they set up the waterboard to nearly drown their captives. CIA interrogators used the controversial waterboarding technique 183 times on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. 

Former Vice President Dick Cheney has also acknowledged supporting torture. “I was a big supporter of waterboarding,” he boasted in a television interview in February.

Illustration by: Matt Mahurin

One must wonder whether they were enjoying, like Kafka’s officer or commandant, remote thoughts about their minions inflicting pain on untried “enemy combatants”.

On November 5th Al Jazeera reported that Council members in Geneva, Switzerland, levelled a barrage of criticisms at the US administration calling for the closure of the Guantanamo Bay prison and for investigations into alleged torture by US troops abroad.

Torturing untried prisoners is by no means an exclusive province of America. On November 6th, the New York Times reported that a lawyer for 200 Iraqis demanded a public inquiry into what they described as brutal mistreatment by British soldiers in a secret detention centre near Basra.

The lawyer “told the High Court in London on Friday that the abuse amounted to ‘Britain’s Abu Ghraib.’ The assertion was buttressed with video recordings.”

Echoes of Kafka, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and the CIA’s black holes of extraordinary rendition reverberate from the UK.

The US administration continues to deny that torture is torture. “Let there be no doubt, the United States does not torture and it will not torture,” says Harold Koh, legal adviser at the US State Department. 

Kafka should be a must read for all government officials, prison staff, members of the military and responsible citizens.

Posted in USAComments Off on THE TORTURERS REVISITED

Shoah’s pages

www.shoah.org.uk

KEEP SHOAH UP AND RUNNING

November 2010
M T W T F S S
« Oct   Dec »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930