America’s DNA Profile Has Been All Over Afghanistan Since 1973
Tuesday, 13. July 2010
In the two years since the publication of our book Invisible History: Afghanistan’s Untold Story we have had the chance to address dozens of forums and radio audiences around the United States about Afghanistan. It has been an illuminating exercise, not so much in terms of what Americans understand about the Afghanistan/Pakistan region (which unfortunately isn’t very much) but by the way it reveals how Americans are struggling to catch up with a world that seems to have left them behind. A morning-drive-time radio talk show host in Chicago wanted to know whether a nuclear bomb dropped on the Hindu Kush wouldn’t solve the problem. When we replied that using a nuclear weapon to kill a few thousand suspected terrorists would kill millions of innocent people, he responded abruptly before cutting us off: The Japanese got the message when we dropped it on them.
Most people are confused about the America they find themselves in, in the 21st century. They wonder where “their” America went. According to the popular mythology, the U.S. started the decade as the world’s lone hyper-power, beholden to none. It ends the first decade of the new millennium as a debt-hobbled-capitalist shell, beholden to a rising communist China and a host of oil-rich medieval Middle-East Sheikdoms. Americans are frustrated and resentful, denying any responsibility for the ongoing Afghan fiasco while expressing anger and often disbelief that our leadership has refused to learn the lessons of Vietnam and taken us on yet another mindless ride into a hopeless quagmire.
When we are asked why the U.S. is still in Afghanistan after a decade, we explain that America’s DNA profile has been all over that country since 1973. While no one was looking, the CIA’s secret mission became entangled with Pakistan’s support for Afghanistan’s small core of foreign-trained right wing Islamic extremists. Thanks to President Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, this entanglement blossomed into a marriage following the 1978 Marxist coup and a full-blown commitment to holy war and the Islamization of Pakistan – long before the Soviet invasion of 1979.
The United States continued to support the right wing extremists all through the 1980s and then (in order to serve the interests of Pakistan’s military and Saudi/American oil conglomerates) the CIA helped Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI) to establish the Taliban. The Taliban’s inability to totally conquer Afghanistan and their close relationship with the Arab extremists known as Al Qaeda challenged this American relationship. But it was the 1998 bombing of the U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Nairobi and the near sinking of the U.S.S. Cole in Aden harbor in 2000 that strained U.S./Taliban relations to the breaking point.
We then explain that for very much the same reasons that the Soviet Union overreacted to extremist provocations on their southern border in December 1979, the United States invaded Afghanistan following the events of 9/11. The intention was to drive the Taliban out of power and root out, intercept, kill or capture Al Qaeda terrorists and their leader Osama bin Laden, the reputed 9/11 architect.
This information usually produces audible groans and looks of profound despair, followed by the question, why has none of this happened? That answer we now believe has been revealed.
In A June 24, New York Times article titled, Pakistan Is Said to Pursue a Foothold in Afghanistan,[1][1] the authors maintain that according to Afghan officials, Pakistani Army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani personally offered to broker a deal between Hamid Karzai and the Taliban leadership including Sirajuddin Haqqani’s terror network and his Al Qaeda allies. The report also maintained that Kayani and his spy chief, Lt. General Ahmad Shuja Pasha agreed with Afghan president Karzai that the U.S. effort in Afghanistan was doomed to fail “and that a postwar Afghanistan should incorporate the Haqqani network, a longtime Pakistani asset.”
Wiretaps long ago revealed General Kayani as an extremist sponsor playing a double game, who referred to the Haqqani network as a “strategic asset.” Both Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh have publicly linked Pakistan’s ISI to terror activities. Reports of Pakistani complicity in the events of 9/11 linger unresolved. But does the Times’ revelation of an active Pakistani military collusion with Al Qaeda-conduit Haqqani and Washington’s admitted “nervousness” about it, mean that the U.S./Pakistani relationship has finally been pushed to the breaking point?
The United States has spent a decade and hundreds of billions of dollars chasing Osama bin Laden and his mysterious organization known as Al Qaeda around the world. It has given billions more to Pakistan’s military to fight Al Qaeda terrorism. The U.S. continues to trample standards of international law by executing suspected terrorists (including Americans) without trial and at the same time suspends civil liberties at home. Pakistan’s offer and Hamid Karzai’s receptiveness to it represents a checkmate move. Whether anyone in Washington can admit it or not, Kayani has exposed the “war on terror” and its Bill of Rights-busting USA Patriot Act, as a tragic deception. A recent study by the Institute for the Study of War’s Jeffrey Dressler picked up on the glaring incongruities of the rapidly devolving scenario.
“The Haqqanis rely on Al Qaeda for mass appeal, funding, resources and training, and in return provide Al Qaeda with shelter, protection and a means to strike foreign forces in Afghanistan and beyond. Any negotiated settlement with the Haqqanis threatens to undermine the raison d’etre for U.S. involvement in Afghanistan over the past decade.”
But if the raison d’etre for American involvement over the last ten years has made the Haqqanis and Al Qaeda even stronger than they were before, then perhaps the time has come to consider that the raison for the war on terror has been revealed as a double-cross.
A May 31st 2010 article in the London Sunday Times reports that $1½ billion dollars of Saudi Arabian money has flowed into Afghanistan from Haqqani and Al Qaeda controlled territory in North Waziristan over the past four years and the U.S. government knows it. In the 1980s the U.S. with Saudi Arabian backing went out of its way to finance and train the Haqqanis under the auspices of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and warlords like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. According to numerous sources, a good part of the ISI/Hekmatyar operation involved assassinating Afghan nationalists to ensure that a moderate coalition government in Kabul could never be achieved. According to declassified U.S. government documents from the early 1970s, the focus on controlling Afghanistan even then was viewed as centered on a “Chinese-Iranian-Pakistani-Arabian peninsula Axis with U.S. support.” Thanks to Pakistani General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, there is little reason to think that the Taliban, Haqqani network and Al Qaeda are any less connected to their ultimate goals today than they were forty years ago
# # # #
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. Their next book Crossing Zero The AfPak War at the Turning Point of American Empire will be published February, 2011.
This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.
camusrebel Says:
And finally the Fitzgeralds hint at the crux of the issue:
“the war on terror…is a tragic deception”
True.
Why was the WoT launched? purportedly in response to 9/11
ergo, 9/11 was a tragic deception, i.e., inside job.
Now we are getting somewhere.
camusrebel Says:
But the WoT actually was planned out much earlier. Nafeez Ahmed makes a good case for its beginnings being sketched in 1979, in his seminal “War On Truth”.
Of course we can’t forget that the ’93 WTC bombing was orchestrated with FBI assistance.
Kingfisher Says:
“But the WoT actually was planned out much earlier.”
Heh, very little (good)planning has gone into the “war on terrorism”; much of the “war on terrorism” is for domestic political consumption.
“Nafeez Ahmed makes a good case for its beginnings being sketched in 1979, in his seminal “War On Truth”.”
If by “good case”, do you mean taking article quotes culled from secondary-research and mashing them into a pseudo-Marxist cookie-cutter?
“Of course we can’t forget that the ‘93 WTC bombing was orchestrated with FBI assistance.”
You have said this several times, and I will again ask you to provide some evidence to this assertion. Will you again neglect to do so?
Look, there was a lot of mistakes with the 1993 case and a lot to hold against the FBI for it, but to say it was “orchestrated with FBI assistance” is a huge stretch.
remo Says:
i guess the predator drones of democracy and freedom aren’t ‘bringing the love’ into enough Afghani lives to swing the balance toward locals understanding the humanitarian aspect of jesus/msm warriors torturing loved ones in black sites and blowing up wedding parties..
More chocolate maybe?
anyway the US is going to need those soldiers at home to quell the unrest released upon the homeland of Chertoff, once the great deception’ of 911 and the war of terror is exposed. We could get U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein to adjudicate the new 911 investigation.
camusrebel Says:
the patsie taped his FBI handler. He said, paraphrasing, “you told us the bomb was fake, we didnt agree to a real bomb” it is in the public record from the court case. Google is your friend.
Just like all the other domestic “terror” plots, our gov. found a bunch of disgruntled Arab Americans and set them up, hook line and sinker,
Even McVeigh was not supposed to be stopped for a minor traffic violation.
Oak. City was going to be blamed on Arabs, as all the TV stations were saying at first.
One thing we agree on, fishbait, it’s all make believe Kabuki theatre for “domestic consumption”
JRF Says:
Kingfisher, camusrebel is totally correct about the FBI being involved in the ’93 World Trade Center bombing. Peter Lance has written extensively on this subject, and it’s not even debatable. It should also be noted that there have been numerous instances of false-flag operations that have taken place in this country’s (and numerous others) history. The Gulf of Tonkin comes to mind. JFK, RFK, MLK Jr., and all the other political assassinations come to mind. Oklahoma City and 9/11 are just so obviously false-flag black operations (or Deep State operations, see Peter Dale Scott for more on his take and perspective of this subject). I would also recommend that you google a man named Col. Fletcher Prouty, and really read or listen to what he has to say from an insider’s perspective. Just to be brief, he was the Air Force liason to the CIA when it was first created in 1947 and directed by (Allen, I think) Dulles. Check it out.
It’s great to see Fitzgerald and Gould finally connecting the dots. This is the best piece I have read on this website. My only question is: what took so long to finally be up front and honest about what is really happened and continues to happen today?
Kingfisher Says:
“the patsie taped his FBI handler. He said, paraphrasing, “you told us the bomb was fake, we didnt agree to a real bomb” it is in the public record from the court case. Google is your friend.”
I looked and couldn’t find anything to substantiate your claim, even took Lance’s books off my shelf for a look. It is a simple and fair request to ask for some evidence to support your claim here; again you have deflected it and failed to deliver. Weak.
Kingfisher Says:
“Kingfisher, camusrebel is totally correct about the FBI being involved in the ‘93 World Trade Center bombing. Peter Lance has written extensively on this subject, and it’s not even debatable.”
In which case you should have no problem providing evidence to support such a claim; please do so in your next post. Your endorsement that CR is “totally correct” or opinion that things are “just so obviously false-flag black operations” is not evidence.
camusrebel Says:
Did you try this cool new invention, it’s called Google. Type in 93 WTC bombing FBI. You will get hundreds of hits. You will find the names of Emad Salem’s FBI handlers John Anticev and Nancy Floyd.
The whole sorry mess is there. I know your usual deniability troll games, fishy. They are so old. You have someone state where they got the info, then discredit the source. How clever. It will not work this time. Actually it has never worked come to think of it.
If by some amazing chance someone reads this thread who didn’t already know the FBI was behind the 93 bombing, they do now. You cannot discredit all the hundreds of sites a Google search will bring up that elaborate the FBI’s role in vivid detail. Sorry. You loose.
Maybe your handlers can put you on another assignment. Your act here has grown very stale, redundant, boring and sad.
There is even a clip of Dan Rather introducing a short piece on CBS news that mentions a few salient points of the Bureau’s complicity from October 28, 1993, during the trial.
camusrebel Says:
Meant to say the CBS clip is on YouTube. It’s title is:
Rare TV NEWS report about WTC bombing FBI foreknowledge
camusrebel Says:
So, now the question becomes, WHY would the FBI want to bomb the World Trade Center? Why did the PTB want to create a phony War on Terror?
One can speculate many nefarious motivations but the biggest one must have been the recent collapse of our previous boogey-man, the Soviet Union. Can you imagine how the term “peace dividend” scaired the living bejesus out of them?
Kingfisher Says:
“There is even a clip of Dan Rather introducing a short piece on CBS news that mentions a few salient points of the Bureau’s complicity from October 28, 1993, during the trial.
Meant to say the CBS clip is on YouTube. It’s title is:
Rare TV NEWS report about WTC bombing FBI foreknowledge”
What in that report supports your assertion that the bombing was “orchestrated with FBI assistance”? That it failed to thwart the bombing even though there was some possibility of doing so? The government fails all the time. Look at K-12 public education in our country – it’s been a miserable failure for years now, a global laughingstock.
remo Says:
public education lack is a laudable complaint . the 1993 bombing is open to new investigation because it surely pertains directly to the 2001 attack, which is the golden egg.
Maybe a reading of the Bentham science paper on Nanothermites in the dust will penetrate the fog. Or NISTs abject refusal to discuss ‘free-fall’, while having to acknowledge it in the violent destruction of #7 WTC.
These matters would be part of the new world curriculum K-12 deep state 101. Where the melting points of steel and extra-to-gravitational-collapse energy requirements turning hundreds of acres of concrete into dust, and flinging vast tonnages of steel up to 600 feet in symmetrical lateral ejections are understood in the context of a constructed ‘war of terror’, and the manipulation of a population unable to recognize a LIE because of its psychological packaging.
If we wanted to start discussion on proof on this site, maybe we should start with 911. The Alpha and the Delta. The event closest to our hearts.The event with all that evidence out there already. Other moments might fall into place after that.
JRF Says:
Kingfisher says regarding my last comment:
“In which case you should have no problem providing evidence to support such a claim; please do so in your next post. Your endorsement that CR is “totally correct” or opinion that things are “just so obviously false-flag black operations” is not evidence.”
This is the beginning of the biography of Peter Lance’s latest interview (May 1, 2010) on Anti-War.com’s Anti-War Radio with Scott Horton:
“Peter Lance, author of Triple Cross: How bin Laden’s Master Spy Penetrated the CIA, the Green Berets, and the FBI–and Why Patrick Fitzgerald Failed to Stop Him, discusses Ali Mohamad’s infiltration of the U.S. government, the Egyptian core of al Qaeda, how the FBI could have prevented the 1993 WTC bombing, informant Emad Salem’s heroic attempt to infiltrate the Blind Sheik’s cell and later get him convicted of the bombing, FBI manager Carson Dunbar’s unbelievable arrogance and incompetence, field agent Nancy Floyd’s exemplary service, …..”
What is key here in this brief description is these two key passages: “….how the FBI could have prevented the 1993 WTC bombing, informant Emad Salem’s heroic attempt to infiltrate the Blind Sheik’s cell and later get him convicted of the bombing, ……”
Go to this link to hear the entire interview: http://antiwar.com/radio/2010/05/01/peter-lance/#idc-container
I download these and other podcasts and have listened to the entire interview, and Lance clearly states that the FBI was complicit. Now, Peter Lance does not believe that 9/11 was an inside job, which is clearly the case. He claims that there is no definitive evidence of this, in which case he clearly has not researched the subject.
See this debate about the above statements regarding Peter Lance’s view about 9/11: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFiRePACahM&feature=related
You can’t even explain what happened that day without acknowledging the fact that those buildings were blown up.
Mike Says:
Who is in that photo? He looks like he’s turning into Darth Sideous.
Kingfisher Says:
“What is key here in this brief description is these two key passages: “….how the FBI could have prevented the 1993 WTC bombing, informant Emad Salem’s heroic attempt to infiltrate the Blind Sheik’s cell and later get him convicted of the bombing, ……””
I’ve read the Lance books. The FBI failed to thwart the bombing, but what supports the assertion that the bombing was “orchestrated with FBI assistance”? There is a huge difference between screwing-up and orchestrating.
“I download these and other podcasts and have listened to the entire interview, and Lance clearly states that the FBI was complicit. Now, Peter Lance does not believe that 9/11 was an inside job, which is clearly the case. He claims that there is no definitive evidence of this, in which case he clearly has not researched the subject.”
I hope Peter Lance punches one of you Truthers in the face the next time one of you say something like this to him.
EricC Says:
It doesn’t seem to matter how much evidence you throw at King fish bait, he just ignores your evidence and moves on to something else to doubt or criticize. He ignored camusrebels post with google search terms to back up his argument. Drawing uncomfortable conclusions on 9/11 or the 93 bombing are far from stretches, they’re pretty logical when you’re unafraid to connect dots and keep an open mind. Also Kingfisher, check out John Taylor Gatto’s “Underground History of American Education”; K-12 education isn’t a failure, it does exactly what it was designed to do at it’s foundation, which is to keep the general public from thinking critically. If you don’t have the time to check out the book, check out a couple of podcast interviews with the author: http://gnosticmedia.podomatic.com/entry/2010-03-05T00_01_15-08_00
His research sure explains a lot regarding how willfully ignorant most of the public is when it comes to issues of real importance that require spending some time thinking about.
camusrebel Says:
Ihanks to all here that so eloquently “got my back”
However, without nattering nabobs and naysayers we would just be preaching to the choir. That gets boring quick.
So in the interest of fun and excitement, I’ll take the fishbait.
OK, FB, you claim the FBI “failed to thwart” the bombing.
Why would they do that? Motivation? Objective?
“Failed to thwart” implies you believe they could have but chose not to.
Please do not back pedal into an incompetence plea or “bungling”, that would be the height of intellectual dishonesty.
JRF Says:
Peter Lance seems unwilling to connect the dots. You cannot blame all of these coincidences strictly on incompetence. All of these events are Deep State operations (see Peter Dale Scott’s research or, even better to understanding how all this works, check out what Col. Fletcher Prouty has to say [he happened to be involved in the creation of the CIA and the set up of, in his words, The Secret Team]). What I don’t understand is why Sibel and other authors that write articles for this website cannot come out and speak the truth about 9/11 and so many other events in history. We know the Gulf of Tonkin was staged. The New York Times just had an article detailing this yesterday!!
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/15/world/asia/15vietnam.html
_r=1&scp=1&sq=gulf%20of%20tonkin&st=cse
We know the US Liberty was bombed by Israel at the direction of our government (Lyndon Johnson specifically told commanders of other ships in the area to stand down and that he wanted that ship to “go straight to the bottom of the sea.”) I mean, there is a historic precedent of governments staging events, usually false-flag terrorist events, to manipulate the public into accepting more government control and power. Google Operation Glaudio. The evidence is out there. Those unwilling to connect the dots, including Lance and Kingfisher, are clearly living in a false reality or are afraid of the truth. Until we can recognize this as a society, we are going to continue to digress as a species and fall prey to the anti-democratic factions that make up The New World Order.
Mike Says:
Here is a clip of the phone conversation between The FBI informant Emad Salem and an FBI agent John Antichev–3:38 is the interesting spot. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmcidzFa4hg
remo Says:
The risk of repetition always a problem, We don’t have to go far back to find flaps of false flag. Highly suspicious is the Korean sinking of the Cheonan. remember? March 26. north korean torpedo out of the blue in a time of easing tension. Right at the moment the Okinawa base agreement was under threat of not being resigned, and something to do with South Korean Armed Forces Authority being reinstated from ‘Allied’[US] control? suddenly a boat goes down and evidence of a ‘north Korean torpedo’……
Blow me down if Asia times didn’t report credible information flows of ‘other hands’ involved. Of another story…..
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/LF04Dg02.html
911 is still the big one. The one weighting down real progress in the world. A society cannot push forward, not truly, with the weight of LIE as heavy…as onerous as 911 on its tail.
JRF Says:
I completely agree that we don’t have to go far back to find examples of false flag events. Look at what happened on Christmas Day with the Nigerian patsie. This was clearly a handled individual. His own father admitted in the New York Times that he consulted with the CIA station chief in Lagos, Nigeria, meaning the CIA definitely had knowledge of what was going on. I’m just trying to establish the history, the precedent, of false flag events perpetrated by the US (with involvement of other governments) government. What happened March 26th surely fits the pattern of false flag events, no doubt.
9/11 still is the big one, indeed. Once again, until we can face that fact, and come to grips with it and find the entire truth about the event, we will live in the 1984 society George Orwell (Eric Blair) described so well in his book. The big problem is trying to explain these facts (and many many others that are inconvenient or completely destroy one’s worldview) in a rational way. Something I work on everyday, and have really been focusing on lately. The truth always comes out.
Nate Says:
Excellent piece. Thanks for writing it. I wonder if it would have been worth mentioning what Sibel has disclosed regarding our covert assistance for the mujahideen right up until 9/11. That probably would make the case even stronger.
Question–can you refer me to the declassified documents which you referred to that reveal the true motivation behind our involvement in Afghanistan? Are they available in the US Foreign Relations Series or the CIA electronic database?