Terror Acts in US: Who Gains? (I)

If the terrorist acts had not taken place, they should have been invented. Since a long time the weakening of US global clout has been an issue in focus. The Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World report says the US economic and military leadership is going to become a thing of the past pretty soon. Instigating anti-terror campaign invariably serves US interests. First: it facilitates solution of internal problems. Second, the vanishing empire has no chances to preserve global hegemony. So, it is absolutely important to prevent global competitors from getting hold of and dividing the heritage.

What has really happened?

According to official version, the Tsarnaev brothers, the Chechens by origin, are the perpetrators of crime. It means a Russian trace is found from the very start, something to inevitably affect the US-Russian relations. Now, it is expected that Russia will be accused of not doing enough to fight «Islamic terrorism», something to be followed by demands to allow US military presence on Russian, Central Asia and Caucasus soil.

The Boston tragedy is not the only terrorist act on US soil taking place in a short period of time. The explosions in Texas and Atlanta, the ricin-laced letters sent to President Obama and Senators Roger Wicker and Carl Levin, all these actions are instigating panic in the country. But it strikes an eye that in other cases the perpetrators are not given so much attention to, if any. Perhaps it’s not so easy to create an enemy image that would be convincing enough to be imposed on the world. And a lot of things are really peculiar here…

First, the terrorist acts had very different patterns and wild geography to be committed by one organization. Second, no group has claimed responsibility so far, though publicity is something terrorists want normally. Third, there are too many inconsistencies.

The remnants of a pressure cooker the FBI says was part of one of the bombs used during the Boston Marathon on April 15, 2013 (AFP Photo / FBI)
The remnants of a pressure cooker the FBI says was part of one of the bombs used during the Boston Marathon on April 15, 2013 (AFP Photo / FBI)

The Boston bombs are reported to be made from ordinary pressure cookers. Like if planned by scenario, the information popped up right in time to make remember that a media outlet published an article describing the way to make a pressure cooker bomb in 2010. So, it’s hard to imagine Arab speaking terrorists discuss the bomb making process in native tongue keeping away from other people who could hear them. As one can see, it was enough just to post the information in a common accessible-for-all internet outlet in the language the US anti-terrorist agencies could understand. And it would sure get the attention of interested audience and be used in the right place when the time comes.

The second inconsistency is the Boston marathon pictures with Navy SEALs around. The uniform and detonators are to easily distinguishable for people and cameras, installed in great number in US cities after the 9/11.

Third – an egregious blunder. The Facebook page devoted to Boston explosion victims had appeared a few hours before the event actually took place. The posting time was 7.37. The explosion time was 2.49 PM (EDT). Neither terrorists, nor US special services ever gave a reason to be suspected of mental retardation. So the action had been planned in advance to strike the attention of amateur-conspirologists.

Special services practice cover-up operations, things like stuffing open sources with information destined to divert attention from real deeds and plans. The presence of uniformed SEALS on pictures and visible slip-up related to the Facebook page look like disguised cover-up. The home-grown conspirologists will reveal the «scoop», while readers will be satisfied spreading open secrets around.

Real goals and the people behind the Boston tragedy are not known and there is a little chance it will ever come in the open. But the question who benefits from intensification of «fight against terrorism» is easier to answer.

After the Twin Towers were destroyed on September 11, 2001, $800 billion have been spent to upgrade US security. As a result of fiscal cliff, the US faces $85 billion cuts this year, including $46 billion for the military. The cuts to government agencies total $1.2 trillion over 10 years. 800,000 civilian employees are facing furloughs, the Navy is to ground four air wings, and the Air Force will reduce training flights. The United States has already cancelled the plans to deploy advanced versions of missile defense systems in Poland and Romania. Twice in the last two decades, significant cuts in U.S. and western military spending were foreseen: first after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and then in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. But both times military spending soon increased,

At the same time the Obama policy evokes angry reaction from Republican hawks. For instance, the decision to suspend the fourth phase of missile defense plans in Europe made them accuse the President of collusion with Moscow. The reluctance to launch military intervention in Syria and Iran, the «betrayal» of Israel and military cuts also pour gasoline into the fire.

The Financial Times says tense debates on US security issues are to start in a few days. Influential German Die Welt points out the Boston act investigation means a lot for Obama. The Americans may question his credibility concerning security matters.

The cookers explosions, allegedly an open secret since 2010, and the Facebook dumb move – it all illustrated the Obama’s inability to tackle the issues related to national security. It’s a bit more complicated with SEALs; the President will have hard time proving that he never ordered the Special Forces to start man hunting their own citizens. Obviously, the temptation is high to accuse the Democrats of failing to properly control the special services.

Whatever, the new wave of terror across the United States will certainly spur the increase of expenditure for military and fight against terror purposes. Just exactly what the military lobby wants.

«New world order» and Jihad alliance

The 9/11 tragedy entailed the «global fight against terror» declared by then President Bush Jr. In reality it resulted in Al Qaeda branches coming to power in many countries of Middle East and boosting US presence in Eurasia. It seems to be surprising at first glance. But the United States launched the practice of using terrorism to its advantage as far back as the middle of the XX century. The best example is Irangate under Ronald Reagan. Then the Central Intelligence Agency sold arms to Iranian terrorists to use the money for funding Nicaraguan contras.

U.S. President Ronald Reagan meets the Mujahideen at the White House, 1985.
U.S. President Ronald Reagan meets the Mujahideen at the White House, 1985.

The United States played the main part in provoking the rise of «Islamic terrorism». Back in January 1979 Zbigniew Brzezinski promulgated the long-term «strategy of tension» in the region; being employed to ultimately divide and conquer the Middle East and Central Asia. The aim was the destabilization of the region’s countries in the name of preserving the West’s hegemony over the «Arc of Crisis.» According to him, thought threatening for the West, it was the best weapon against the Soviet Union.

In 2011 Global Research published an article by Professor Peter Dale Scott titled The US-Al Qaeda Alliance: Bosnia, Kosovo and Now Libya. Washington’s On-Going Collusion with Terrorists. The article says «Brzezinski did not hesitate to play the terrorist card against the Soviet Union: he reinforced the efforts of the SAVAK (the Shah of Iran’s intelligence service) to work with the Islamist antecedents of al-Qaeda to destabilize Afghanistan, in a way which soon led to a Soviet invasion of that country.8 At the time, as he later boasted, Brzezinski told Carter, «We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War». CIA Director William Casey continued this strategy of using terrorists against the USSR in Afghanistan. At first the CIA channeled aid through the Pakistani ISI (Interservices Intelligence Service) to their client Afghan extremists like Osama Bin Laden to help him in efforts to create the Arab-Afghan Foreign Legion (would-be Al Qaeda). According to Scott, Al Qaeda has been a chief US ally in all wars since 1989. For instance, the US supported Islamists in Bosnia and Kosovo; in 1993 the formations of Al Qaeda were used to topple the President of Azerbaijan. Al Qaeda provoked interventions in Afghanistan and Sudan, Islamic terrorists are used by the US to boost its presence in Central Asia and separate the Caucasus from Russia.

The extremists are sparring partners of the US fighting the «axis of evil», creating pretexts for accusing the US adversaries of involvement into terrorist activities. In January-February 2012, the United States and the European Union adopted «crippling sanctions» to make Iranian economy go down. Other countries were reluctant to join, as well as some US and European businessmen. Like if on order, an explosion took place near the Israeli embassy in Delhi, at the very same time it was reported an explosive device was found near the embassy of Israel in Tbilisi. Iran was to blame, the sanctions were approved. The Iranian trace appears to be leading to the Mujahidin-e-Khalq Organization, which is extremely hostile to the incumbent Iranian government. The United States planned to delete it from the terrorist list. World media shied away from highlighting the issue.

Today the US longtime allies from the ranks of Muslim Brothers and Al Qaeda have surfaced the wave of the Arab Spring to come to power in some countries of Maghreb and the Middle East, Washington has supported extremists fighting legitimate governments in Libya and Syria.

To be concluded…

Source: Strategic Culture Foundation

One Comment

  1. Pingback: Terror Acts in US: Who Gains? (II) | Oriental Review

Leave a Reply