11/06/2002 Entry: "Conspiracy Theory Theory"
Conspiracy Theory Theory
They leave little evidence
“A conspiracy is rarely, if ever, proved by positive testimony. When a crime of high magnitude is about to be perpetrated by a combination of individuals, they do not act openly, but covertly and secretly. The purpose formed is known only to those who enter into it. Unless one of the original conspirators betray his companions and give evidence against them, their guilt can be proved only by circumstantial evidence...”
[Special Judge Advocate John A. Bingham, quoted in The Trial Of The Conspirators, Washington, 1865]
Viewer Commentary: 23 comments
Another good man, Henry Gonzales had a good idea. http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BOY211A.html
Posted by north wind @ 11/06/2002 04:09 PM EST
Why are those who speak only well-documented truth given the derogatory label of conspiracy theorists? Have been puzzled by the angry debunking posters to this site whose sometimes scatological remarks are here right along with postings of well-researched facts. Maybe because the terrible truth of the actual conspiracy going on--which, thanks to the internet and the few like vox who tell it like it is, cannot be hidden from the view of the masses as so much has been all through history--maybe it's because of fear of the truth--kill the messenger and then the message will go away--but Truth, like Love, endures.
Keep on speaking, vox.
Posted by Kathleen Beatty @ 11/06/2002 07:04 PM EST
Yeah...They would LOVE for you to believe that.
Here is a little archive of what they are ALREADY doing to us.
No conspiracy here.
Posted by Mech @ 11/06/2002 07:56 PM EST
Yes True indeed.
Truth is a scary thing when you have been living in illusion all your life.
Truth will not be realized on a Global Scale, But only in the hearts of individuals.
Let the Deepness Flow .
When the Student is Ready the Master will Come.
Posted by Power of Soul @ 11/07/2002 01:51 AM EST
Truth *will* be realized on a Global Scale. It has already begun. For as the lies pile up, the base becomes unstable and will inevitably collapse.
Sometimes the truth cannot be denied, or hidden, or obfuscated - no matter how hard a group of conspirators try. New World Order, meet "Old World Orderer."
Now I Believe I Really Understand
Posted by Human Being @ 11/07/2002 05:53 AM EST
I don't know how secret or covert they are these days, it seems to me that they've been pretty blatant with 9/11, Bali and the DC sniper events. A lot of people are not buying the official cia/illuminati/media spin.
But in a less lethal way they have been giving us hints --
Are others seeing an increase of masonic symbology and New World Order references these days?
I was just on the freeway near where I live (California) and while I was stuck in traffic I caught site of a big truck with a beefy white guy driving in front of me with a license plate that read "NWO 4LIF", I am sure his license plate wasn't referring to "Nintendo World Order for Life".
The prior week I was watching MSNBC's "Summit on Wall Street" and I was shocked when I saw the graphics they used for that program's logo. The animated logo used the two pillars of masonry, Boaz and Jachin, and then from behind the pillars one saw two lines draw upward to the point of a pyramid and then a golden light radiate out from the peak. I don't have to explain to many of the readers that this is a freemason/illuminati sign. The program also featured key national and international bankers (illuminati) in what looked like a Masonic temple. Did anyone else notice this?
The week before that I saw the illuminati eye used as the main graphic on a story that had to do with the Lockerbie victims' compensation package.
Well, maybe that's not so weird as the black helicopter with the big red cross on its side that I saw flying extremely low right over my house a few week's ago. I wish I would have waved to him -- with my middle finger raised high in a salute. ;)
Posted by CS @ 11/07/2002 08:02 AM EST
You think that is blatant. Our own intelligence department no longer hides the fact that they work for the New World Order.
Personally...I think the NWO does not necessarily include masons so much as they are global elites who want things their own way.
Posted by Mech @ 11/07/2002 10:15 AM EST
A shocking website found by Mech. I think masons are just useful dupes for global elites. Most masons are decent folk. But they are among the secret societies with rituals derived from ancient (Babylonian, Egyptian, and so on) traditions condemned by the very Bible they claim to believe.
Posted by MR. ELEVEN @ 11/07/2002 01:08 PM EST
Here's my 21st century allegory of the cave to help us deal with all this talk of conspiracies and the truth.
Imagine that you were born on an island in a community in which everyone was blind. You are born and raised there. Everyone’s feeling their way around, tripping over shit, Darwin takes care of the dumber kids by watching them fall off of cliffs.
So, here you are 5 years old watching your mom about to walk into a tree. “Mamma, watch out, you’re gonna hit that tree.” Bam! Too late. “How’d you know that was there son?” “Mom, can’t you see it, right there in front of you?” Quickly, your mom realizes that you are crazy. Always talking about seeing stuff. A concept completely foreign to everyone else.
You’ll grow up to be ostracized as the crazy kid that talks about seeing things. How can you ever explain this facet of your reality called sight? Sorry son, you can’t. All your explanations tell people is that you are insane.
So here we are in the 21st century, everyone has been told since day one that the USA is the greatest country in the world (even I am in error here, I’m in the US and so I assume everyone else has been force fed the same propaganda as me).
Land of the Free, Home of the Brave. You’re free to do as you please except for anything that some judge has been coerced into making illegal.
Innocent until proven guilty. You are innocent, however, you have to stay in jail until trial unless you can come up with bail!
All men are created equal. I too can dunk just like Mike.
Capitalism is great.
Buying stuff makes you happy. Buying stuff makes you broke, so you have to work more, so that you don’t have time to take a look around and see what’s really going on.
If you love your country, then you would not disagree with it.
Be good or Santa won’t come this year.
Be good or you’ll go to hell.
Good things come to those that wait. That’s right, there’s always a good meal at the local shelter, if you don’t mind waiting in line for it.
Your vote makes a difference. Yeah, it creates more work for people busy losing ballots.
The USA is the greatest country in the world. As soon as we are effectively the only country (we might already be) in the world, then we are the greatest by default.
If you don’t like our country then you can get out. Where else can you go? American ideals and laws are forced upon everyone else on this planet.
We’ve all heard crap like this all our lives. One morning you wake up, and you start to see the bullshit. It’s piled up everywhere, on every slogan, on everything. It’s quite a mixed blessing we have here. I can see through all this bullshit, and everything I see makes my stomach ache, my hands shake, and blood boil.
So now I find myself here, typing this, my first post on voxfux. Experience tells me that people generally don't read whatever's on message boards. They're too busy thinking about another post. To busy chatting away just to hear their heads rattle. Which is fine, because I'm justing airing out ye olde cranium too.
In conclusion, the truth will set you free. BULLSHIT. Realizing that there is not truth, only perception. Believing in nothing, and instead accepting everything as an interesting idea. That's what set me free.
Posted by Jimini @ 11/07/2002 02:00 PM EST
Jimini, are you really set free or is that merely your perception and does it matter to you?
Posted by MR. ELEVEN @ 11/07/2002 02:38 PM EST
It's not a prison if you never try the door
Posted by valis @ 11/07/2002 03:24 PM EST
Interesting question, I've already asked myself that countless times.
It appears to me that I am set free of many of the constraints upon which others fall. But that of course is filtered through my perception.
Does what matter to me? That my freedom is merely whatever I may perceive as freedom? That it's all in the eye of the beholder?
It is merely my perception. Of course, my perception is my reality.
Some days I just wish I could go watch the news and sip on a Budweisr. Cheer on our troops, our team. Sometimes, I wish I could be a good american consumer and nothing more. But that doesn't work for me.
If you're gonna play this game of life, you've gotta play the hand you've been dealt.
Posted by Jimini @ 11/07/2002 03:26 PM EST
Jimini, I personally believe in the existence of an objective truth outside of the human race. Just look up on a starry night! The only problem is, finding the truth is hard, while creating lies is easy. This gives the advantage to the ruthless deceivers who are now in the final stages of conquering the planet. But to be honest, a look at history shows that this is the way it's always been since the dawn of civilization -- social hierarchy and lies.
If there is ever a revolution to end this sorry state (in which humans are basically just clever chimps, with the same kind of social heirarchy), the new system will have to guard against ruthless deceivers -- a rather vexing conundrum I'm afraid.
Basically *everyone* would have to be more interested in gaining truth than in gaining power.
Barring that, we might consider trying to put women in charge. Somehow it seems like things would be better, if not perfect. But that could always be overthrown. Perhaps we could use genetic engineering to soften the impulse for aggressive power grabbing and increase empathy, leaving a legacy of true freedom to our sentient post-human progeny.
I wish I knew.
Posted by knight @ 11/07/2002 03:59 PM EST
Life is worth living. Love, awareness, passion.....seeing the truth on several different levels.
Once the doors of perception are cleansed...truth speaks.
The shit is going to hit the fan...We all need to be prepared.
Time to smash the Matrix.
Posted by Mech @ 11/07/2002 04:44 PM EST
CS - not to discredit your other observations, but there's a big chance the truck driver you saw was just a fan of the pro wrestling consortium known as NWO
Posted by Es Verdad @ 11/07/2002 04:45 PM EST
bush said today that his top priority is to make the office of "Homeland Security a reality.
I sense some frantic desperation on his part. I know damn well that this will have little if no reults in protecting citizens. It may give joe-average soccer mom piece of mind but hell I know better.
He wants to implement this organization before (if ever) the American people wake up to finally learn that democracy is coming to an end and private, unaccountable power will rule the world.(already does)
It will be too late by then as most are kept sedate in their kennels witha heavy dose of both television and market discipline for them to want to fight for radical change. I can see the desperate tactics of some to try to wake them up but most will choose to stay asleep.
Posted by Mech @ 11/07/2002 06:27 PM EST
Bush + Bin Laden = The Carlyle Group
Posted by Mech @ 11/07/2002 06:54 PM EST
All empires collapse as this one soon will. Bush will eventually die as will all of his supporters and opponents. The dead are all equal and there is no hierarchy in the grave. Yet the universe will go on with us or without us. Life exists due to the perfection of natural systems and balances and as some would say, including myself, devine intelligence. Therefore, let us unite in seeking the ways of perfection and balance rather than the ways of collapse and destruction. Let us start with ourselves.
Posted by MR. ELEVEN @ 11/07/2002 07:38 PM EST
This is the fight of our lives...we may never get another chance before they finally start taking people away in mass for opposing them. It's nice to understand the relationship of the natural world...but I can't see any "perfection and balance" in our current state. For the past 2 years has been astounding in the rise of dissent, the growing police state and what VOX has been warning us about... threats and terrorist acts perpetrated by a shadow government.
Don't fall back asleep!!! I know it's hard...but don't do it!
Posted by Mech @ 11/07/2002 08:14 PM EST
ZZZZ... Sorry. So let's see. The Reichstag has burned. The nationalists have been swept into power. Bush will soon be declared dictator of the most powerful human made entity in known history. What should we do about it?
Posted by MR. ELEVEN @ 11/07/2002 08:27 PM EST
Grab a quill off of the porcupine my friend.
Cut off the tail that is wagging the dog.
Posted by Mech.. @ 11/07/2002 08:56 PM EST
Thanks Es Verdad, that would perhaps explain why the guy was so beefy!
Posted by CS @ 11/08/2002 02:05 PM EST
Washington: Parent of the Taliban and Colombian Death Squads
by Jared Israel [Posted 5 June 2001]
In his eye-opening article, "When Human Rights No Longer Matter", Garry Leech writes that:
"In a throwback to the days of the Cold War counterinsurgency campaigns, the Colombian Senate recently passed a bill authorizing the nation's security forces to wage war against the Colombian people in the name of anti-terrorism...All military and civilian contractors stationed in Colombia should be withdrawn and the delivery of Blackhawk helicopters scheduled for July should be postponed until the Colombian government re-aligns its policies and laws with the norms of international humanitarian law, both on paper and on the ground." (1)
It is true that, in the past, both Washington and its clients in the Colombian government and military paid lip service to opposing Colombian death squads. At the same time, it was known that the death squads a) were U.S.-trained, b) were advised by U.S. covert agents and c) were comprised of soldiers from the official Colombian military.
Now, Mr. Leech reports, the Colombian military is to be officially transformed into one big death squad with a plan for "war against the Colombian people in the name of anti-terrorism."
Barry Leech is right that we should oppose all U.S. military 'aid' for Colombia as long as the military engages in 'human rights abuses.' But what does this mean? By its nature, the Colombian anti-drug war has always been a war against the Colombian people. It has always relied on abusing human rights, starting with the particularly important right to stay alive.
This history of abuse, now celebrated in a democratically endorsed plan "to wage war against the Colombian people in the name of anti-terrorism," could not exist without the approval of Washington's foreign policy planners. Because the Washington foreign policy establishment is the true constituency of the Colombian government. Take away Washington, and in short order the Colombian puppet state would collapse.
IS U.S. "MAKING A MISTAKE" IN COLOMBIA AND AFGHANISTAN?
The U.S. Establishment always tries to dominate the language of foreign policy discourse. In this way, critics are maneuvered into accepting premises which limit their field of view and therefore the scope of their criticisms.
For example, Washington argues that it is pouring almost a billion dollars a year into military ''aid'' to Colombia in order to "win the drug war". Similarly it claims it is giving $43 million more to the Taliban authorities in Afghanistan to reward them for banning the cultivation of poppy plants used to produce heroin and opium.
"Last week [Bush]pledged another $ 43 million in assistance to Afghanistan, raising total aid this year to $ 124 million and making the United States the largest humanitarian donor to the country." ('The Washington Post,' 25 May 2001)
Supporters and opponents of Washington's policies tend to accept these claims about the "drug war." Consequently the debate is framed in Washington's terms: "Should the U.S. give aid to anyone, no matter how foul, as long as this helps the drug war?" If they accept this frame of argument, critics are trapped into responses that assume Washington is making a mistake, that it is letting itself be used by monsters.
The premises involved in this frame of argument are lies.
First, Washington is not engaged in a drug war. That's public relations baloney. Washington is the political sponsor of the key forces behind the drug trade.
Second the war on drugs is a cover for waging a real war against forces striving for independence in strategic areas such as Colombia and, more important on a world scale, the Balkans and the Central Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union.
Third, Washington is the creator and patron of the governing terrorists in Afghanistan (the Taliban) and in Colombia. To say Washington is 'aiding' these forces is like saying farmers 'aid' their crops or parents 'aids' their children.
THE DRUG INTERESTS ARE IN CHARGE OF THE DRUG WAR
Despite all the rhetoric, Washington is not interested in stopping the drug trade. From Iran-Contra to the Afghan anti-Soviet war to the Islamist terrorists currently attacking the former Soviet states to the KLA to the Colombia death squads, Washington's proxy armies are deeply and increasingly involved in the drug trade. Drug gangs provide terrorist-military training and produce vast sums of money. This money enables Washington's proxy armies to mount formidable campaigns against target countries without Washington have to shell out impossibly large sums of money.
A 'Boston Globe' article (an excerpt is posted at the end, see Footnote 4) states that Washington's Kosovo Liberation Army is heavily involved in a drug distribution system that starts in Afghanistan and Pakistan and ends up in Western Europe. This drug business involves 400 BILLION dollars a year. (Not that the KLA gets all this money. But we are discussing gross revenues greater than those of IBM, Microsoft and Intel combined. And that's just the Afghanistan-to-Europe trade.)
Washington sponsors and protects this drug trade because drugs provide crucial money and terrorist personnel for Washington's drive for world domination.
The same is true in Latin America. Take Washington's Colombian 'drug war' for example. If this was aimed at stopping the drug business, Washington would focus on penetrating and jailing the powerful drug interests and their Establishment connections. That is, not just the rich drug cartel gangsters, but the gangsters-in-a-suit in big banks and corporations:
"A more sensible U.S. policy should also include a focus on drug factors closer to home. For example, the Clinton Administration might consider cracking down on U.S. and other Western corporations involved in exporting to Colombia the enormous quantities of the precursor chemicals required to process raw narcotic plant material into hard drugs. Drug processing, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is an extremely "complicated" process, requiring "sophisticated equipment and skills," as well as "expensive chemicals" like potassium permanganate, ether and acetone "that are harder to find and often not manufactured in the processing country." Those that bear the brunt of aggressive U.S. supply-side drug policies in Colombia - peasant cultivators, petty drug pushers, and the guerillas - are clearly not the major players in the lucrative, transnational narcotics industry. The U.S. should also consider devoting funds to an in-depth investigation of the major multinational banks and companies involved in laundering billions of dollars in drug revenues. If anything, the volume of money laundering has grown in recent years even as the U.S. public's consciousness of the problem has declined.
"Alberto Galan, brother of murdered Colombian presidential candidate Luis Carlos Galan, emphasized the weakness of U.S. policy in not probing this link between private corporations and drugs. Washington, according to Mr. Galan, avoids "the core of the problem. The economic ties between the legal and illegal worlds. The large financial corporations. It would make a lot more sense to attack and prosecute the few at the top of the drug business rather than fill prisons with thousands of small fish." (My emphasis. Quoted from "Heading for Disaster," at http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/hemisphr.htm )
Instead of going after the big fish, Washington directs the 'drug war' against coca and poppy fields and the poor farmers who cultivate these fields in areas controlled by FARC, the Colombian liberation army.
By destroying these particular fields, the U.S. and its Colombian proxies drive up the value of the coca and poppy controlled by Washington's Colombian proxies, that is, by the military men and their death squads who are intertwined with the Colombian drug cartels and through them with major financial interests which 'launder' billions in drug profits.
To justify fighting a 'war on drugs' against small farmers who (conveniently) live in guerilla-controlled areas, Washington and the media pedal the story that the FARC guerillas control the drug trade. This is comic book-level propaganda. Washington's motto should be, "A dumb public is a happy public."
"While the FARC undoubtedly generates wealth through the "war taxes" it levies on drug processors and traffickers, as well as through the abduction of foreign corporate executives and wealthy Colombians for ransom, there is no direct evidence linking the rebels to the actual export of drugs to the U.S. Available evidence reveals that among the primary transporters of drugs are right-wing paramilitary groups in collaboration with wealthy drug barons, the armed forces, key financial figures and senior government bureaucrats.
"The creation of the United Self-Defense Groups of Colombia (AUC), the official title of the loosely-connected paramilitary organizations formed in the 1980’s, was made possible in large part through the private fortunes amassed through their leaders’ earlier involvement in the drug trade. The AUC, in fact, was outlawed in 1989 after government investigations revealed that Pablo Escobar, the notorious boss of the Medellin drug cartel, had taken over one of its largest paramilitary operations.
"The paramilitaries, composed of right-wing extremists (including many military and police officials) virulently opposed to the guerillas and their sympathizers, have become a mainstay in Bogota’s anti-FARC campaign. While the AUC is personally repugnant to President Pastrana, his efforts to curb explicit collusion between the Colombian security forces and the paramilitaries have been futile. So, while army helicopters routinely attack coca and poppy fields within rebel territory, major drug lords and their paramilitary cohorts are able to conduct their own drug operations with relative impunity." ("U.S. Policy Towards Colombia About To Massively Veer Off-Track" at http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/hemisphr.htm )
If the U.S. government were "fighting the drug war" to stop the export of drugs to the U.S., as it claims, it would focus on those who organize and profit from the export of drugs, instead of destroying the fields (and poisoning the land, animals, and children) of poor peasants who live in FARC-controlled areas.
The U.S. war against drugs doesn't fight drugs. So what is its purpose?
REAL TARGET OF THE "DRUG WAR"
For a hundred years Washington's Latin American policies have aimed at preventing the formation of a unified block of nations that could challenge U.S. domination. Washington's methods: repress and atomize; install anti-popular oligarchs in small, weak states. Give 'aid' to these little monsters who could not survive a year without Big Daddy Monster to the North. In this fashion, Washington has brought untold misery to the Latin American people.
Currently there is a threat to these policies. The Chavez government in Venezuela is politically independent. It has the temerity - the audacity - to ask: "What is good for Venezuelans?" And then there is the powerful FARC in Colombia.
Check out a map. Venezuela is northeast of Colombia. Colombia is south of Panama. Both Colombia and Venezuela border Brazil, second most populous country in the Americas. And Colombia is north of Peru and Ecuador. Together, Colombia and Venezuela constitute the northern cap of South America.
Both Colombia and Venezuela have oil.
If the Colombian FARC wins, it could mean a Venezuelan/Colombian/Cuban alliance that would attract Latin American people and possibly even some existing government(s), like a magnet.
Both Chavez in Venezuela and the FARC in Colombia call for social justice and national sovereignty. This is a compelling mixture; contagious.
In response, Washington is attempting semi-covertly to overthrow Mr. Chavez. At the same time, Washington is escalating its atrocious counter-insurgency campaign against the progressive nationalists in FARC. The methods being used against FARC are as old as Rome and as recent as Vietnam: punish and murder the ordinary people who support the forces fighting the U.S. Make the cost of independence prohibitive.
The present U.S. Secretary of State, that nice guy, Colin Powell, is no stranger to this strategy:
"In his 1995 autobiography, My American Journey, Powell describes burning peasants out of their huts in 1963, 'starting the blaze with Ronson and Zippo lighters.'
"'Why were we torching homes and destroying crops?' Powell asks rhetorically. 'Ho Chi Minh had said the people were like the sea in which his guerillas swam. We tried to solve the problem by making the whole sea uninhabitable.'" (Quoted in "Nobody's hero," at http://www.inthesetimes.com/web2504/edit2504.html)
It's one thing for Powell to admit the murderous character of what the U.S. did in long ago Vietnam. But were Washington to admit it was using the same strategy in Colombia, most Americans would be horrified. Hence the huge public relations campaign, disguising the Vietnam-style operation going on right now in Colombia behind the facade of a war against drugs.
IS WASHINGTON 'AIDING' COLOMBIA AND THE TALIBAN?
OR IS IT IN FACT SUPPORTING ITS OWN CREATIONS?
The "Does the drug war justify us giving aid to monsters?" argument confuses the real relationship between Washington and said monsters, such as the Colombian military/death squads, and the Taliban authorities in Afghanistan.
This confusion is expressed eloquently by Robert Scheer, who once edited "Ramparts," the late great antiwar magazine. A recent article by Mr. Scheer is entitled, "Bush's Faustian Deal with the Taliban." If you remember your Goethe, this would cast Junior as a lowly mortal who makes a deal with the devil, a much more powerful figure. Here's Mr. Scheer:
"Enslave your girls and women, harbor anti-U.S. terrorists and destroy every vestige of civilization in your homeland, and the Bush administration will embrace you. All that matters is that you line up as an ally in the drug war, the only international cause that this nation still takes seriously.
"That's the message sent with the recent gift of $43 million to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, the most virulent anti-American violators of human rights in the world today. The gift, announced last Thursday by Secretary of State Colin Powell, in addition to other recent aid, makes the United States the main sponsor of the Taliban and rewards that "rogue regime" for declaring that opium growing is against the will of God. So, too, by the Taliban's estimation, are most human activities, but it's the ban on drugs that catches this administration's attention." (http://www.bartcop.com/531taliban.htm)
Bob Scheer thinks the Taliban are a monstrosity of indigenous origin. In his view, it is outrageous for Americans to let themselves be duped into helping these beasts simply because the beasts have (supposedly) banned drugs. If America does this it will become the Taliban's main sponsor. And so on.
The problem is, it is too late for Washington to become the Taliban's sponsor because Washington gave birth to the Taliban in the first place. (2)
The maternity bill? Over six BILLION U.S. dollars. And that was 1980s money, mind you, so we're talking about a much bigger bill in current U.S. dollars. Washington is the monster parent of this monstrous child.
To preserve the mental equilibrium of Americans, the mass media tries to avoid publishing evidence of Washington's Taliban patrimony. Nevertheless, sometimes some of the truth slips out. Take for example a 'NY Times' article published three days after the U.S. bombed some facilities in Afghanistan:
"The Afghan resistance [sic!] was backed by the intelligence services of the United States and Saudi Arabia with nearly $6 billion worth of weapons. And the territory targeted last week, a set of six encampments around Khost, where the Saudi exile Osama bin Laden has financed a kind of 'terrorist university,' in the words of a senior United States intelligence official, is well known to the Central Intelligence Agency.'
"The C.I.A.'s military and financial support for the Afghan rebels indirectly helped build the camps that the United States attacked. And some of the same warriors who fought the Soviets with the C.I.A.'s help are now fighting under Mr. bin Laden's banner.
"From those same camps, the Afghan rebels, known as mujahedeen, or holy warriors, kept up a decadelong siege on the Soviet-supported garrison town of Khost.
"Thousands of mujahedeen were dug into the mountains around Khost. Soviet accounts of the siege of Khost during 1988 referred to the rebel camps as 'the last word in NATO engineering techniques.' After a decade of fighting during which each side claimed to have killed thousands of the enemy, the Afghan rebels poured out of their encampments and took Khost." (From 'New York Times,' August 24, 1998. For more on this see 'Credible Deception: The Times and the Sudan Missile Attack')
Six billion dollars. And that's what the CIA admits spending. How much more did they spend that they don't admit?
U.S. covert support for the Taliban has continued throughout the middle and late 1990s, mainly through Washington's junior partner, Saudi Arabia.
TALIBAN AID: PART OF THE ATTACK ON RUSSIA
The Taliban aid package coincides with Washington's increasing attacks on the former Soviet Union in general and Russia in particular. The current very public offer of $43 million in aid is a destabilizing warning to the Central Asian states of the former Soviet Union. The message is: you better work with us, not Russia, or we can unleash the Taliban against you.
At the same time, Washington holds out a carrot, offering to provide the Central Asian Republics with military aid. The idea is to offset Russian military ties and increase the U.S. presence in these countries. By having a large contingent of U.S. military (and therefore of course the CIA as well) directly involved inside the Central Asian states, Washington can select the best targets for bribes, thus augmenting the efforts of U.S.- funded "democracy groups" which are presently setting up 'civil society' Fifth Column organizations in these countries.
If the U.S. can make these countries dependent on US military aid (and training, and of course spare parts) Washington can guarantee that their weapons and military plans are insufficient to defeat Taliban-connected terrorists. Moreover, Washington can supply these Islamist terrorists with military intelligence.
Which, by the way, is precisely what Washington has been doing in Macedonia. (5)
-- Jared Israel
Posted by USA is the 4th Reich @ 11/08/2002 03:58 PM EST