Apocalypse of the American Mind
Friday, 22. January 2010
Colonel Kurtz: Did they say why [Captain] Willard, why they want to terminate my command?
Captain Willard: They told me, that you had gone totally insane and uh, that your methods were unsound.
Colonel Kurtz: Are my methods unsound?
Captain Willard: I don’t see any method at all, Sir.
Francis Ford Coppola, Apocalypse Now
One thing that remains consistent over the last 30 years in observing America’s participation in Afghanistan is that mistakes and errors of judgment, no matter how egregious or self-defeating, never seem to get corrected. In fact, in its effort to rationalize a growing culture of war-making from Vietnam to Afghanistan, America has come around to embracing the insanity of the fictional Colonel Kurtz.
Without a care for the consequences, the U.S. first fostered Islamic extremists in the 1980s (repackaging them for public consumption as “fiercely religious freedom fighters”), then endorsed the rise of the Taliban by claiming they were a “cleansing” force (apparently for these same fiercely religious freedom fighters). According to former CIA operative Milt Bearden, the U.S. also helped facilitate the Arab infiltration of Central Asia by assisting Al Qaeda and ultimately redirecting Osama bin Laden out of the Sudan and into Afghanistan. The Washington beltway and a large segment of the media reveled in the genius of their new “method,” for undoing communist influence and securing Central Asia.
Once a person with a cause has been linked to a policy and established in Washington, that person remains forever as the go-to person regardless of their subsequent history. One such example is the Afghan terrorist, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who, like Mephistopheles appears and reappears in the Afghan narrative at various points in time only to vanish in a puff of smoke.
Hekmatyar’s reputation was established back in the late 1960s as a high school student when he joined the communist People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) and then attended the Mahtab Qala military school in Kabul. By the early 1970s Hekmatyar had become radicalized by extremist Islam and joined the Nahzat-e-Jawanane Musalman (Muslim Youth Movement). As an engineering student at Kabul University he became known for throwing acid at women dressed in Western clothes and for murdering a fellow student from a Maoist faction of the PDPA. Imprisoned by King Zahir Shah’s police for the murder, Hekmatyar was freed following a 1973 coup by the King’s cousin Mohammed Daoud and communist PDPA leader Babrak Karmal and fled to Pakistan.
Hekmatyar joined with Ahmad Shah Massoud’s Jamaat-e-Islami (Islamic Party) in a Pakistani plan designed by their Directorate of Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) to destabilize Afghanistan with cross border raids. Dissatisfied with the radical Jamaat’s political approach after failing to stir an uprising in Afghanistan, Hekmatyar formed his own more radical party, the Hisb-e Islami (Islamic Party) and came to the attention of the CIA. In 1979, Hekmatyar helped to precipitate the Soviet invasion by engaging Afghanistan’s desperate Marxist President Hafizullah Amin in a power sharing arrangement. According to the British publication The Round Table of April 1981, (No. 282) the Soviets panicked when they realized Amin had set December 29th as the date for dissidents of the regime and their tribal supporters to march on Kabul.
Hekmatyar would go on to become the darling of the agency and receive the bulk of the U.S. and Saudi aid coming in for the war against the Soviet Union, including a monopoly on Stinger missiles. Although an ISI and CIA favorite, Hekmatyar’s legitimacy as a fighter, his effectiveness, his loyalties and even his goals raised doubts in the Peshawar-based American press corps. According to CBS News stringer Kurt Lohbeck in his book, Holy War, Unholy Victory, Hekmatyar’s reputation was an elaborate ruse concocted by the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI to elicit Congressional support for the Mujahideen, and little else. “Gulbuddin had no effective fighting organization. He had not a single commander with any military reputation for fighting the Soviets or the Afghan regime. He had made alliances with top regime military figures. And he had killed numerous other Mujahiddin commanders. Yet the United States government and the covert agencies were doing their best to convert that lie into reality.”
The man largely responsible for peddling Hekmatyar’s dubious credentials to Washington was Texas Congressman Charlie Wilson, who had been carefully shoehorned into strategic positions on both the House Appropriations Committee and Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence by then Republican congressman from Wyoming, Dick Cheney. Following the war against the Soviets, Hekmatyar’s reputation didn’t save him when his failure to establish a Pakistani friendly government in Kabul lost him Saudi and American sponsorship. But while American influence flowed to the Taliban, Hekmatyar continued to lobby for sponsorship and a return to power by acquiring political asylum in Iran, trying to join ranks with Al Qaeda and cutting deals with the Taliban.
Marked for death by the CIA following the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, Hekmatyar survived a Predator drone attack in May 2002 but continued to rally Taliban fighters against the United States and coalition forces. On February 19, 2003 both the United States Department of State and the United States treasury declared Hekmatyar a “global terrorist.”
Reportedly now aligned with the Taliban, Hekmatyar’s power base resides in the provinces near Kabul and the scattered pockets of Pashtun communities in the north and northeast. Yet, despite his label as a terrorist and major narcotics trafficker, his Hesb-i-Islami party supported Hamid Karzai’s reelection bid in the August 20, 2009 elections and he is now reportedly being courted by special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke in the hopes of luring him into a relationship with the Afghan government.
As twisted as the original U.S. support for Islamic extremism may seem today following the events of 9/11 and nearly 9 years of war, the idea that Hekmatyar might somehow once again be on America’s go-to list as a potential messiah for Washington goes beyond the pale of rational thinking and into the realm of Colonel Kurtz. Empowering Hekmatyar as a “method” for destabilizing Afghanistan in the early 1970’s was at least, “unsound.” Putting him back into a position of power and influence in Kabul as a method for resolving America’s growing Afghan crisis reveals that the method is insane. Or, in the words of Captain Willard, “I don’t see any method at all.”
Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould, a husband and wife team, began their experience in Afghanistan when they were the first American journalists to acquire permission to enter behind Soviet lines in 1981 for CBS News and produced a documentary, Afghanistan Between Three Worlds, for PBS. In 1983 they returned to Kabul with Harvard Negotiation project director Roger Fisher for ABC Nightline and contributed to the MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour. They continued to research, write and lecture about the long-term run-up that led to the US invasion of Afghanistan. They are featured in an award winning documentary by Samira Goetschel. Titled, Our own Private Bin Laden which traces the creation of the Osama bin Laden mythology in Afghanistan and how that mythology has been used to maintain the “war on terror” approach of the Bush administration. Invisible History: Afghanistan’s Untold Story published by City Lights, January 2009 chronicles their three-decade-focus on Afghanistan and the media.
This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.
Sibel Edmonds Says:
Okay, I go first: I for one am a big fan of Gould-Fitzgerald. This piece, just like the previous ones, factual, to the point, well-written, and free of any partisan angle or ‘Washington Circle’ agenda. Thank you Liz & Paul!
pj98rider Says:
If this acid-throwing monster is embraced in any way by the U.S.,it should be screamed about and denounced from every corner of the web. Great piece Liz and Paul and thanks for bringing his possible courtship by Holbrooke out in the open. Ann Jones speaks about this evil piece of s__t in her book Kabul in Winter…It ain’t pretty.
JamesLaffrey Says:
Yes, the Gould-Fitzgerald team is valuable in our struggle to restore (or perhaps create for the first time) a true representative democracy.
But I suggest a different point-of-view on what Gould-Fitzgerald call “mistakes and errors of judgment” by the U.S. government. The creation of terrorists, the instigation of international “crises,” and the re-use of murderous duplicitous thugs are goals — goals — of the U.S. government.
When you realize that these are goals, not “mistakes,” then you can see the logic of our horrible history since the CIA went from defense to offense.
And when you see that logic and understand who in our government orders and supports all these crimes, you know that any effort to persuade current leaders throughout the government to “correct” their “mistakes” is a total waste of time.
We must replace those leaders, as a group.
(I’m working on it.)
ZicaTanka Says:
@JamesLaffrey: I agree with your statements about intention, however, I’m wondering if you think that a better name for those with such motivations would be the ‘establishment’, rather than the ‘government’.
Even though those in government may be the same or puppets of the establishment, when they are, we might as well say they are not actually acting as a part of our government. And when they are replaced, the stains are not left on the name of our government, but of the establishment and their attempted destruction of our government.
Greg Bacon Says:
MR. MINETA: No, I was not. I was made aware of it during the time that the airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, “The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out.” And when it got down to, “The plane is 10 miles out,” the young man also said to the vice president, “Do the orders still stand?” And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, “Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?”
http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/alibis/cheney.html
We can keep chasing ghosts or we can get to the bottom of 9/11. From that inside job sprung almost all of the evils infecting the world.
It’s a narrative that has been turned into an ideology and a religous mantra that keeps Americans filled with hate for the Muslim world.
And that’s just fine with Wall Street, the Pentagon and Apartheid Israel.
“Say, this New American Century” is turning out like some sort of “Project!”
Cheered Says:
Thanks for the contribution. For me Hekmatyar is really nice example of yet another psychopathic personality used for covert political purposes. Free from any sense of empathy, completely ruthless, ideologically flexible (indifferent actually), and charming enough to form and maintain a power base, a typical psychopath.
I do not share Fitzgerald’s and Gould’s assessment “that mistakes and errors of judgment, no matter how egregious or self-defeating, never seem to get corrected.” Intelligence agencies know how to select and use their human capital and invest heavily in it. Psychopaths like Hekmatyar will be employed for the only purpose they are really good for: disrupting, stealing, confusing, demoralizing, killing, cajoling, and creating all kinds of other misery for the decent people the psychopath is exposed to.
Hekmatyar is not Holbrookes first psychopath encounter (Karadžić for example to help to break-up the Balkans). While captain Willard doesn’t see any method at all, Holbrook does, and he has used this method successfully before.
Poor Afghans.
JRF Says:
“As twisted as the original U.S. support for Islamic extremism may seem today following the events of 9/11 and nearly 9 years of war, the idea that Hekmatyar might somehow once again be on America’s go-to list as a potential messiah for Washington goes beyond the pale of rational thinking and into the realm of Colonel Kurtz.”
I suppose one could characterize original U.S. support for Islamic extremism as “twisted” given the events of 9/11 and years of endless, illegal wars, however, one would have to be extremely ignorant of U.S. foreign policy and history to make that characterization. Original support for Islamic extremism by the U.S. government was a calculated, strategic initiative taken by the military and CIA in order to combat the Soviet Union, smuggle drugs and control the international narcotics trade, and recruit agents for use in “black operations”. Why can’t any writer on this website just come out and tell the truth: 9/11 was an just another manifestation of the “deep state” carrying out a false flag operation against the citizens of this country. Sibel, you just had Dr. Nafeez Ahmad on your podcast (which I love!!) and he seems so far to be the only commentator to actually understand that the connection between the “deep state” (which consists of a network of various elements in positions of power in the government, military, intelligence services [most importantly CIA], and private sector, and has connections with criminal networks abroad) and the events of 9/11. Why can’t we just come out and tell the truth about who runs things in this country and how they do it? By not acknowledging the basic truth about 9/11 and other incidents in U.S. history (Bay of Pigs, JFK, RFK, MLK assassinations, Oklahoma City, Franklin Cover-up, Iran contra, CIA-led coups, economic terrorism, ect.), we do a disservice to the level of dialogue that needs to be taking place in order to combat the illegal, undemocratic forces that have highjacked the essential functions of the government.
True Oil Says:
As President Barack Obama told the good people of Lorain Ohio yesterday, “I will always fight for you”.
Thanks for the dots Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould.
Gould-Fitzgerald Says:
Hello,
We appreciate all who have taken the time comment on our article. We’d like to addres these points:
JRF Says: “I suppose one could characterize original U.S. support for Islamic extremism as “twisted” given the events of 9/11 and years of endless, illegal wars, however, one would have to be extremely ignorant of U.S. foreign policy and history to make that characterization. Original support for Islamic extremism by the U.S. government was a calculated, strategic initiative taken by the military and CIA in order to combat the Soviet Union, smuggle drugs and control the international narcotics trade, and recruit agents for use in “black operations”. Why can’t any writer on this website just come out and tell the truth:
JamesLaffrey Says: “But I suggest a different point-of-view on what Gould-Fitzgerald call “mistakes and errors of judgment” by the U.S. government. The creation of terrorists, the instigation of international “crises,” and the re-use of murderous duplicitous thugs are goals — goals — of the U.S. government. When you realize that these are goals, not “mistakes,” then you can see the logic of our horrible history since the CIA went from defense to offense.”
Cheered Says: “I do not share Fitzgerald’s and Gould’s assessment “that mistakes and errors of judgment, no matter how egregious or self-defeating, never seem to get corrected.” Intelligence agencies know how to select and use their human capital and invest heavily in it. Psychopaths like Hekmatyar will be employed for the only purpose they are really good for: disrupting, stealing, confusing, demoralizing, killing, cajoling, and creating all kinds of other misery for the decent people the psychopath is exposed to.”
It raises the question that we don’t appreciate that the US government did embrace psychopaths to guarantee the disastrous outcome for the people of the region. We want to state for the record, we do recognize that possibility. In an article we posted last 2/24/09 at http://www.counterpunch.org/fitzgerald02242009.html on Heckmatyar titled, The Man Who Shouldn’t be King (of Afghanistan) we speculate on that very point in the article: “But should Gulbuddin Hekmatyar be allowed to make a political comeback, the new administration may find that partnering with the devil himself might be a better choice than with Afghanistan’s longest running and most notorious holy warrior.According to a Washington Post report, Hekmatyar’s Hesb-i Islami organization is gaining support in every province in Afghanistan. This news followed a Times of London report in which the British ambassador to Afghanistan Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles reportedly stated that the best hope for Afghanistan was to install “an acceptable dictator.” Should the Pashtun Hekmatyar emerge as Cowper-Coles’s suitably acceptable dictator, an increasingly desperate and financially impaired U.S. could be faced with a defacto extremist victory. Or could it be that within the serpentine meanderings of Washington’s foreign policy aristocracy, a Taliban/Hekmatyar ruled Afghanistan may have been the plan all along?
As you can read here, we have acknowledged that the circumstantial evidence does support the speculation that, “a Taliban/Hekmatyar ruled Afghanistan may have been the plan all along.” Regardless, we didn’t include that speculation in the current piece. The truth is that solid facts speak for themselves but speculation can only go so far. There is a lot of speculation trying to pass for facts all over this issue. We do not want to get caught up in the trap of maing claims that are not backed up by solid evidence.
Sibel Edmonds Says:
@ Gould-Fitzgerald: Point well maed; I agree with you. This is why it is important to present these facts and let those facts speak…Then, put all of them together and watch the picture emerge: Stark picture, indeed!
Sibel Edmonds Says:
‘made’ not maed’:-) Been typing with one finger (laptop) with a sleeping baby on my lap…
JRF Says:
@Gould-Fitzgerald
“The truth is that solid facts speak for themselves but speculation can only go so far. There is a lot of speculation trying to pass for facts all over this issue. We do not want to get caught up in the trap of maing claims that are not backed up by solid evidence.”
OK, then let’s look at some facts:
-As Sibel has talked about, the CIA (and possibly other US governmental agencies and foreign intelligence agencies) had a working relationship with the Islamic extremists in Afghanistan, including “the Bin Laden’s”, in order to combat the Soviets in the 80s.
-Numerous journalists, national security experts, and other “whistleblowers” have documented how the FBI, CIA, NSC, and others (including President Bush himself), knew of an impending attack against the US directed by al-Qaeida [please see anything Peter Lance has written about this subject, Peter Dale Scott, David Ray Griffin, Lt. Col. Anthony Schaffer and his experience with Able Danger, I could probably go on...]
-Mohammad Atta, a CIA asset, as documented by Daniel Hopsicker, was in Florida RUNNING DRUGS for the CIA along with other CIA agents
-see this report by Thomas Burghardt (someone who NEEDS to be on Boiling Frogs immediately!!) who reviews a US Army Special Operations Forces report titled “Unconventional Warfare”
http://www.iprd.org.uk/images/stories/pdf/CISS/A%20Hidden%20History%20Covert%20Operations%20and%20Military%20Intelligence%20Policy%20Post-World%20War%20II/Unconventional%20Warfare%20in%20the%2021st%20Century.pdf
Burghardt quotes the “Unconventional Warfare” document, which describes the how the military/intelligence agencies use “irregular forces” to carry out covert, “black” operations:
“Irregulars, or irregular forces, are individuals or groups of individuals who are
not members of a regular armed force, police, or other internal security force.
They are usually nonstate-sponsored and unconstrained by sovereign nation
legalities and boundaries. These forces may include, but are not limited to,
specific paramilitary forces, contractors, individuals, businesses, foreign political
organizations, resistance or insurgent organizations, expatriates, transnational
terrorism adversaries, disillusioned transnational terrorism members, black
marketers, and other social or political ‘undesirables.’”
Those are just a few basic facts. I could go into the history of the CIA as being a creation of Wall Street, the history of CIA sponsored drug running and political assassinations, the overthrow of democratically elected regimes “hostile” to US interests, ect. There are countless other examples relating to 9/11 that point to it being a false flag operation used to create the political climate necessary to engage in endless wars against a shadow network of individuals linked to US intelligence agencies, invasion of sovereign countries to acquire strategic geopolitical dominance of the Middle East/Central Asia, extreme erosion of civil liberties and implementation of a police state. So, with that being said, Gould-Fitzgerald (and Sibel), please address this issue that I raised in my last response:
By not acknowledging the basic truth about 9/11 and other incidents in U.S. history (Bay of Pigs, JFK, RFK, MLK assassinations, Oklahoma City, Franklin Cover-up, Iran contra, CIA-led coups, economic terrorism, ect.), we do a disservice to the level of dialogue that needs to be taking place in order to combat the illegal, undemocratic forces that have highjacked the essential functions of the government.
Flanders Says:
We should be as concerned about those, not only in “intelligence”, but the so-called neo-cons whom we can see openly operating daily against the vital interests of the US. One article’s author addresses one such instance:
AF-PAK STUDY GROUP: AMERICA’S UNBALANCED POLICY FAVORING INDIA
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/01/23/af-pak-study-group-americas-unbalanced-policy-favoring-india/
“Aren’t these preparations being made for a possible full scale attack on Pakistan?
However, as a first step, in order to “finish the job” i.e. denuclearization of Pakistan and take-over Balochistans’ rich mineral resources, the world’s largest mines of Gold, Copper and other precious metals, Robert Gates has come out with a “new” theory and of a possible full scale attack on Pakistan’s, western borders, jointly by India and the US, on the eastern borders by India and also a possible naval attack on Gawadar by both the countries, probably that is why US has withdrawn all of its fleets from Persian Gulf and has stationed them in the Arabian Sea.
USA has planned to hand-over Afghanistan’s eastern borders, aligning Pakistan from Nooristan to Kabul, to India, and take full control of the borders, from Kabul to Chaman, along with Balochistan, after getting 30,000 additional troops.”
BillH Says:
I hesitate to post because I feel like a broken record, but… in my opinion, destabilizing third world countries, either to gain control of their resources or strategic value for maintaining western hegemony has been the blatant goal of the “puppet masters” since forever. And maybe they or some of them even believe they are doing the right thing, the best thing for the good of everyone here in the US and hence by extension, the world. For if we are to be the light and lead, well, then we have to be in a position to do that And one can hypothetically argue if the idea of America is a good thing, then her strength is paramount. And ya gotta break a few eggs… But that isn’t what is happening, is it? Our bridges are falling down, our schools are failing, the economy is in shambles… And it’s all a lie.
Arguably, the day the music really died was the final day of the Bretton Woods gathering (July 1944) when the original intended purpose of the IMF was hijacked and perverted from a fundamentally altruistic mechanism to complement the UN and enable developing countries to develop, raise their economic standard and become trading partners, thereby fostering an egalitarian, growing world economy for the benefit of everyone… and turned into a mechanism to bury them in debt and keep them down instead, thereby securing one more step upon which to secure and build or work toward the creation of the military industrial congressional complex and the increasingly fascist security state we enjoy today.
But it didn’t start there and there is so much more to the big picture. This has been going on for a long time. It’s a project with many steps going back to recognizing corporations as persons (that is with the same rights as a person), applying income tax to individual’s wages, creation of the Fed, national banking system(s), fiat currency, fractional banking, etc etc etc.
Some say it is a racist thing, keeping the brown people down, or a religious thing, but, it’s not just third world countries they want to “protect” themselves from, it is also you and me, the little people who might rise up someday.
So how does it feel to be a slave?
Where can a person go to live outside the system anymore? To confront life on his own terms and answer to nobody but God? Even if you wanted to, buy some big piece of wilderness property, fall off the grid and live as you please, and you now owe taxes on the land. Can you barter with the IRS? Nnot really. You must earn money. Must. Hypothetically, I am physically and mentally capable of surviving off the land and living life on my own and God’s terms. I can build or grow almost anything I need, create electricity, build a radio, farm, hunt, brew beer, distill spirits, make wine, etc. But if I try to do that, I’m probably a terrorist or a dangerous kook and the FBI or the IRS will find me and… I suppose I could be a Quaker or join the Amish… or the Eskimos… but… well… you get the idea.
So yeah, War is business. But it’s only one tool in the tool box. These folks seem to have no conscience. We the people are nothing but fodder to them. But then, hasn’t that been the dichotomy since Jesus’ time… and before. What has really changed except the technology?
Anyway, that is what I mean when I say a significant fraction of humans are clinical psychopaths. And this is the real struggle, the real war. A spiritual war, if you will. NOT a religious war. I hate to say good vs evil as these are relative constructs, but, I digress…
The bottom line is fear. There is only one fear. Fear leads to anger leads to hate and violence. And there is only one answer to fear.
And I think you are doing it Sibel. Spreading the word and the truth and… letting your light shine.
All of us needs to set an example, to be a good leader, take responsibility in our own spheres of influence. If not you, who? If not now, when? If only you can see the big picture and the truth of what is happening, then who else but you can do anything about it? The nature of our situation is not really unique in all of history. But our opportunity is. For the first time WE have the ability and the opportunity to connect with everyone on a global level.
And, ironically, for the first time in history we, heck, a single person has the ability to obliterate the planet and completely end what is left of civilization in the blink of an eye with the push of a button.
What if they had a war and nobody showed up? Right? All that’s necessary is for each of us to say “no more”. I won’t participate in this insanity. If you aren’t part of the solution, you are a part of the problem. This is the first day of the rest of your life.
I choose to believe this will be humanity’s finest hour. I don’t see that I have a choice. Do you?
And on that note, I’ll say good night. Sweet dreams. Be well.
spoonful Says:
If only we had Col.Kutz in charge of this government
Cheered Says:
@ Sibel
You said “it is important to present these facts and let those facts speak…Then, put all of them together and watch the picture emerge”.
True, the facts are essential. And this website is a treasure-trove for new facts! I love it.
But we do not start from zero; in fact we have centuries of facts and examples. The Dutch VOC (East India Company) around 1610 was a very good example of a collusion of Western private, military, commercial, and political interests running local feudal lords (like Hekmatyar). The Venetian Merchants before that were similar. So we are watching a continuation of a (stark) picture, not really the emergence.
Of course, the picture has to emerge in each of us individually. Each of us has to be educated individually with active opposition from (not only) the corporate media.
@ Gould-Fitzgerald
In this piece, you have chosen to present your facts and concerns from the “incompetence” angle. Basically this says the US and its allies have good intentions in Afghanistan (Iraq, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Haiti, Chili, Argentine, Italy, etc.) but the realities on the ground are difficult and we, unfortunately, (always) will reach a counterproductive result. Such as the “acceptable dictator” and uninterrupted drug-running while the objective was “democracy” and safety from terrorists.
This is the angle that the media chooses as well. It is the only option if one does not want to disqualify oneself from participation in the public, media-controlled, debate.
The alternative interpretation is that we came to Afghanistan with objectives that are and can be realized with weapons, coercion, military, CIA operations, mercenaries, terror, etc. This is the “competence” angle, and it leads to a select group of people celebrating the bottom-line of 2009 favorably:
- Military industrial complex: “Because our adversaries are low-tech we need to invest in more high-tech weapons, but we had a very good year, thank you.”
- Private contractors: “We rebuild the same bridge for the seventh time, we are also doing fine, thank you.”
- Mining and natural resource extraction industry: “We regret the size and the strength of the popular basis in the area and prefer some additional Balkanization in the next decennium, but we had a very good year, thank you.”
- Drug industry: “Now we have restored the supply side we need to work on the demand side by increasing the need for the self-medication that we offer to the Western world; the recession helped us so we are doing fine, thank you.”
- Prison industrial complex: “We concur with the drug industry, and had a very good year as well, thank you.”
- Military and political wannabes: “We were able to show our particular competences to those who count in this world; we were rewarded generously and had a very good year, thank you.”
- Humanitarian aid: “We regret that we always have to clean up the mess of others, but we thrive in the current mess and had a very good year, thank you.”
- Political operators: “We appreciate your interest in our work, and hope you will do even better in the next year. After the first election we loose, we’ll join you. We can hardly wait.”
I think the contrast between the “incompetent but good intentions” versus the “competence but selfish intentions” explanatory framework is essential for understanding our situation.
Admittedly, the incompetence angle sounds more soothing and less cynical. But as boiling frog I do not want to be convinced that the temperature is less than I thought, but warned that it is even warmer than I feared.
JRF Says:
@Cheered
I really like your “incompetence” vs. “competence” paradigm. Most people I talk to about these issues ALWAYS say how incompetent the government is. The sad fact is that this is what they specialize in!! These people are not incompetent; on the contrary, they know exactly what they are doing. Once again, everyone (ESPECIALLY Gould-Fitzgerald!!), PLEASE read this article to understand what we are talking about:
http://www.iprd.org.uk/images/stories/pdf/CISS/A%20Hidden%20History%20Covert%20Operations%20and%20Military%20Intelligence%20Policy%20Post-World%20War%20II/Unconventional%20Warfare%20in%20the%2021st%20Century.pdf
Like I have been saying, in order to combat and defeat the “deep state”, we first have to be informed about it and discuss it openly. By ignoring these facts and simply glossing over them, we do a disservice to this country and to truth and justice!!
Kingfisher Says:
“-see this report by Thomas Burghardt (someone who NEEDS to be on Boiling Frogs immediately!!) who reviews a US Army Special Operations Forces report titled “Unconventional Warfare””
Only a tormented soul can take a FIELD MANUAL and warp it into anything of political or intellectual substance. This is not to say that Burghardt does not raise anything of substance, he covers some interesting aspects; but he is really reaching in picking apart an FM.
JRF Says:
@Kingfisher
“Only a tormented soul can take a FIELD MANUAL and warp it into anything of political or intellectual substance. This is not to say that Burghardt does not raise anything of substance, he covers some interesting aspects; but he is really reaching in picking apart an FM.”
You are either the most dishonest person or completely ignorant. Please read the document.
http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-05-130.pdf
JRF Says:
From Chapter One, 1-7
“ARSOF (Army Special Operations Forces) has a direct military lineage of conducting UW (Unconventional Warfare), which dates back more than 50 years to the World War II (WWII) Office of Strategic Services (OSS). The United States has conducted UW in support of resistance movements, insurgencies, and ongoing or pending conventional military operations. It has operated by, with, or through irregular forces against a variety of state and nonstate opponents. Such sensitive operations are a high-value component and a specific application of the military instrument of national power. ARSOF UW—properly employed within the context of all such power effectively integrated—is more relevant than ever in the 21st century international environment.”
Kingfisher Says:
You are either the most dishonest person or completely ignorant. Please read the document.”
I’ve read it. Trust me, I happen to know a little bit about the subject matter.
JRF Says:
@Kingfisher
Please enlighten me then!! WTF
Do you have an opinion you’d like to share with everyone on the matter?
Kingfisher Says:
@JRF,
You want my opinions about Unconventional Warfare?
BillH Says:
@ cheered
Competence vs incompetence.
Well said.
The transcript I linked in the “Victims” thread discusses how money or wealth has gone from playing games for its own benefit and more recently come to completely infect and entrench itself in our government to the point that we now live in a true plutocracy. Or perhaps more properly a “plutarchy”. (Plutocracy + oligarchy.) Perhaps that is true in this country, but, this is nothing new in terms of world history. Whether it be royals or corporations or executives of corp’s, the light seems to be fading fast. Although the argument could be made that the USA was founded for reasons of the money, by the money and for the money, there once was a dream of freedom and equality that was not about an equal opportunity to buy Nike’s. There was a certain shared morality and ethics that everyone reminded themselves of on Sunday mornings. Or Saturdays. Or five times a day every day. And most folks tried to live by it, even if only in fear of standing at the pearly gates and having to explain themselves someday.
Bara Says:
It’s been said that any nation with an “a” or an “n” in their name should be wary of the US, especially if their name ends in “stan”. Their best defense is to keep tabs on the shadiest people in their country, and know that the US will try to make those scumbags our allies. Later on, if the nation in question doesn’t capitulate to our desires, we’ll use said scumbags as an excuse to invade. The scumbags either be linked to terrorism or they will provide us with pseudo-intelligence that “proves” the nation in question to be a threat to the west.
JRF Says:
@Kingfisher
Uh, yeah. If you post something here aren’t you generally expected to have something important to contribute?
Kingfisher Says:
“It’s been said that any nation with an “a” or an “n” in their name should be wary of the US, especially if their name ends in “stan”. Their best defense is to keep tabs on the shadiest people in their country, and know that the US will try to make those scumbags our allies. Later on, if the nation in question doesn’t capitulate to our desires, we’ll use said scumbags as an excuse to invade. The scumbags either be linked to terrorism or they will provide us with pseudo-intelligence that “proves” the nation in question to be a threat to the west.”
And how is this different from the Russians or Chinese for that matter? This interpretation of Eurasian History is very shallow.
Kingfisher Says:
“Uh, yeah.”
That’s a huge question. UW covers a broad spectrum of paramilitary activities; from sabotage and subversion to Guerrilla War. The history of Guerrilla Warfare goes back to the classical period, that’s like 2500 years – which I am not about to break down here.
Anything specific about it?
Bara Says:
The Burghardt paper and mention of manuals reminded me of the documentary “The Power of Nightmares: Baby It’s Cold Outside”, where the analysis of the Soviet threat is debated between the CIA and Team B. According to the documentary, the high functionality of the Soviet air-defense system was supported by Team B using a Soviet training manual as evidence.
Considering the membership of Team B, I guess “tormented soul” is about right.
JRF Says:
Well, I find it appalling that our government engages in UW, secretly, without approval from Congress or the American people, and specifically targets civilian populations using false flag operations for political and strategic economic purposes.
Bara and Kingfisher: that manual specifically states that the US government has a specific policy of using third parties for subversion, drug trafficking, human trafficking, arms dealing, ect. From Burghardt’s report:
Right up front they inform the reader that UW establishes a “litmus test” which is
warfare conducted “by, with or through surrogates” and that their preferred assets are
irregular forces:
“Irregulars, or irregular forces, are individuals or groups of individuals who are
not members of a regular armed force, police, or other internal security force.
They are usually nonstate-sponsored and unconstrained by sovereign nation
legalities and boundaries. These forces may include, but are not limited to,
specific paramilitary forces, contractors, individuals, businesses, foreign political
organizations, resistance or insurgent organizations, expatriates, transnational
terrorism adversaries, disillusioned transnational terrorism members, black
marketers, and other social or political ‘undesirables.’”6
This is OK with you?
Kingfisher Says:
“Considering the membership of Team B, I guess “tormented soul” is about right.”
That’s a good observation.
Wolfowitz was actually considered for Director of CIA in 2000; one can only imagine how well that would have gone over at Langley. Fortunately Mrs. Wolfowitz let the powers that be know that Mr. Wolfowitz was screwing around on her with his foreign teaching assistant at Johns Hopkins, and the kibosh was put on that.
Kingfisher Says:
“Well, I find it appalling that our government engages in UW, secretly, without approval from Congress or the American people”
Covert Action requires a Presidential Finding and notification of the relevant Congressional leaders. Congress also pushes its own typically hair brained schemes too (see: Iraq Liberation Act of 1998).
“Bara and Kingfisher: that manual specifically states that the US government has a specific policy of using third parties for subversion, drug trafficking, human trafficking, arms dealing, ect.”
No it doesn’t specifically state that the US government has a specific policy on those things. It is a Field Manual, not a policy directive.
“This is OK with you?”
UW is an instrument of foreign policy that has its uses. All Presidents have made use of it; JFK was an especially firm supporter of it, and ordered the creation of the Army Special Forces.
tonywicher Says:
What I find interesting is the concept that since the Brzezinski-inspired support of the Afghan mujahedeen and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the general U.S. geopolitical strategy has been to covertly support Islamic terrorism around the world.