Understanding terrorism as policy construct, oil, and why we are in Iraq.

[mmonk]

In 1979, a group of powerful people from various countries gathered together in Jerusalem to promote the idea of "international terrorism" as a sort of policy construct. It was a forum set up by Benjamin Netanyahu and was officially known as the Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism. The idea was originally formulated to blame terrorist activities on the Soviet Union as a continual pretext to protect the free enterprise areas of the world dominated by U.S. based multi-national corporations from being taken over by host states as national companies. Some prominent attendees were as follows; George Bush Sr., Ray S. Cline (former Deputy Director for Intelligence at the CIA), Henry M. Jackson (Sen. from Washington State), Richard Pipes (professor and Russian expert in Reagan's Security Council), Sir Hugh Fraser (Conservative MP and former British Undersecretary of State for Colonies), Paul Johnson (former editor of New Statesman), Maj. General Schlomo Gazit (former military intelligence chief of Israel), Lt. Gen Aharon Gazit (Israel), Shimon Perez, Manachem Begin, and Benzion Netanyahu (Cornell University professor emeritus) among others. Interestingly enough, operations of the US helping the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan in an attempt to get the Soviet Union to step into a quagmire and experience their “Vietnam” was underway.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, many thought there could be a peace dividend. Many in the pentagon and the state department had another idea. The US was the remaining super power, and thus with the collapse of the soviet union, there didn’t have to be any more constraints on US policy. This they thought, meant the US could control the world and its economies with its 700+ military bases around the world. Any who opposed this American run world could be dealt with without serious consequence as such was the thinking. The pentagon had always thought that if the US could control central Asia and the Middle East, it could control the energy resources of the world. Hence the real reason of why we are where we are today.

Any doubters need only take a look at the Bremer “orders” implemented after the invasion of Iraq. It is very clear and probably why the compliant media doesn’t discuss such things. Examples are as follows: Order 1-deBathification , Order 2- Dissolve the Iraqi military and intelligence apparatus, Order 12 and Order 54- Trade Liberalization, Order 14 -Prohibited media activity, Order17 -Contractor and military immunity from Iraqi laws, Order 37 and 49- Replace progressive tax system with flat tax system, Order 40 and 94- Iraqi banking open to foreign ownership, Order 62 -Bremer to determine who could run for office, Order 65 Iraqi Communications and Media Commission appointed by Bremer, Order 57 and 77-place American representatives in key decision making positions in the government ministries, Order 80, 81, and 83 Rewrote Iraq’s patent, trademark, and copy write laws. But the most obvious is Order 39. Provision-1, privatization, Provision 2-100 percent Foreign Ownership of Iraqi Businesses, Provision 3 National treatment of foreign investment, Provision-4 Unrestricted Repatriation of Profits for Foreign Investors, Provision 5-Forty Year Leases of Iraqi Real Estate by Foreign Entities and Provision 6 Disputes could be settled in international tribunals instead of Iraqi Courts.

This is, of course why we are over there. This is not the common cry of the followers of the right that we are there so we don’t have to fight them over here. Americans must push for their politicians to come clean. No more talk about a “war on terrorism” or if we left there would be chaos.


Sources
The Bush Agenda. Invading The World One Economy at a Time by Antonia Juhasz
The War on Truth. 9/11, Disinformation, and the Anatomy of Terrorism by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed.

[AntiFascist]

1. Very interesting!

This could explain right-wing involvement of the Mossad. Didn't a former Mossad agent confess that the bombing of Libya was due to false-flag intelligence? There are also ongoing questions surrounding the Lockerbie bombing.

Also note that in the recent bin Ladin tape he seems to be leaning toward communism...:wtf:

[mmonk]

2. The truth is really hard to get at these days.

But terrorism as a policy construct explains alot.

[AntiFascist]

4. Exactly, the OP gets right at the heart of the issue...

and I don't understand why this thread is not getting more attention!

I have felt all along that the WOT is the engine which allows the PNAC agenda to be followed, leading to the globalized privatization of the Middle East and other areas like North Korea. Democracy really has little to do with it. Native people will be shocked and awed, and terrorized, into accepting Western control.

This is nothing new. In 1953 the U.S. and Britain staged a coup d'etat in Iran to overthrow a democratic government which had nationalized the oil industry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax

This ultimately led to the Islamic Revolution, the effects of which we are still dealing with, and planning to war against.

[lukery]

3. great post n/t

[AntiFascist]

5. kick! n/t

[Joe for Clark]

6. That is a very thoughtful post MMONK.

Joe

[ancient_nomad]

7. A Very Good Post.....

informative and spot on. Sorry I missed it earlier. Thanks much!


edited to add:

Kick and Recommended!!

[AntiFascist]

8. kick, and....

here's a link to a great Sibel Edmonds post that is one of the most recommended on DKOS:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/10/17719/2719

exposing the "real culprits of 911"

[Junkdrawer]

9. Talk by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed: "Creating Terror"

1 hour mp3:
ftp://www.radio4all.net/pub/files/[e-mail]/2704-1-20070720-creating_terror_part1edited.mp3

I also recommend Reprehensor's great thread “Deconstructing ‘al Qaeda’":
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1415451

[truedelphi]

10. This is why it is very important to examine the money coming to candidates

If it comes from foreign governments, or the candidate belongs to special organizations that promote a foreign government, best to vote for another candidate.

Of course, my candidate, Kucinich, doesn't come even close to doing the named activities above.

[mmonk]

11. Sibel says people in Congress or other parts of government

get jobs when their civil service is over representing foreign interests. In order to get one of those jobs, they have to serve that interest before they leave government.

[truedelphi]

12. Yep. These days bribery does NOT come (usually) in the form of a bag of

Gold handed over in the wee hours, but in terms of the revolving door - help our cause while you are
in office, and you will gain anexecutive level office inside our domain when you leave Congress.

And of course, many in COngress sell out because without the monetary support of certain PACS, they fear their campaign chests will be too small to allow them to win.

[warren pease]

13. The new social control mechanism...

Beyond its role as war-machine-enrichment excuse, the phony war on terror is also the new social control mechanism keeping the serfs in line, corporate mass media compliant (not that the latter is a particularly hard sell for these cheerleading dipshits), and justifying the rampant violations of the Constitution and international law by BushCo deemed "necessary" to combat this new threat.

It's all bullshit, but this is particularly dangerous bullshit because the war on terror, by definition, can never end. There's no territory to conquer, no armies to defeat, no state to surrender. Just a bunch of ghosts and multinational religious fanatics.

As long as the US is committed to waging war against these people -- rather than treating it as an international police problem -- the domestic and foreign policies of BushCo will continue in some form or other, no matter who's in the White House.

Otherwise, they'll be called "soft on terror," the new "soft on communism" that no viable politician can afford to have placed around their neck.

So BushCo wins again, and will continue to profit from the war on terror even if they decide to resist installing a dictatorship and, instead, vacate their positions in Jan. 2009 and escape to a non-extradition-treaty country -- bank account numbers memorized, billions in ready cash, more billions pouring in each month from various investments in the implements of death, endless tropical luxury at their front door, an army of serfs to maintain the grounds, dozens of armed guards from Blackwater keeping the rabble away...

Makes me wish for an Eichmann II operation, a raid and kidnapping of BushCo principals and their forced extradition to The Hague for trial and very public humiliation. Now that's a dream worth keeping alive.


wp

On edit: A little cleanup.

[mmonk]

14. Yes

And this:

"As long as the US is committed to waging war against these people -- rather than treating it as an international police problem -- the domestic and foreign policies of BushCo will continue in some form or other, no matter who's in the White House."

really bothers me to no end.