Creating Terror - godt foredrag av Nafeez Ahmed fra juli 2007.

• Krigen mot terror i bred historisk kontekst.
• Falskflagg-terror som geo-politisk strategi / strategy of tension.
• Lærer vi den hele og fulle sannhet om nazistene og 2. Verdenskrig på skolen?

Om boken Conjuring Hitler:

"Nazism is usually depicted as the outcome of political blunders and unique economic factors: we are told that it could not be prevented, and that it will never be repeated.

In this explosive book, Guido Giacomo Preparata shows that the truth is very different: using meticulous economic analysis, he demonstrates that Hitler's extraordinary rise to power was in fact facilitated -- and eventually financed -- by the British and American political classes during the decade following World War I."

http://www.press.umich.edu/titleDetailDesc.do?id=136681

Vestlige nasjoner finansierer og bruker selv terrororganisasjonene som er "årsaken" til "krigen mot terror"-paradigmet. Løsningen på problemene, blir vi fortalt av terrorkompisane, er blant annet mangfoldige former for overvåkning. Skap et problem. Presenter løsning. Mål oppnådd. Hvilket system har som mål å fjerne folkets friheter - spionere på sine egne? Og hva slags mennesker ?

Deler av Ahmeds konklusjon:

From 1979 until 2007 ... this amorphous network designated by the term al Qaeda has functioned seamlessly as a mercenary proxy force mobilized in diverse strategic regions in the service of Anglo-American imperial expansionism. It hasn't ever had a break. The extent of it is absolutely shocking ... Western state sponsorship, indirectly and directly, of al Qaeda as a destabilizing force in strategic regions.

Meanwhile, innocent citizens are being killed. They are being killed since 1993 ... yet the policy has not shifted. On the contrary it's now escalating in the context of developling an even more catastrophic conflict with Iran.

This has damning moral implications. It means that at some level, policy makers are morally indifferent to the deaths of our own citizens in al Qaeda terrorist attacks. Other strategic imperatives, such as the control of increasingly scarce energy resources are more important. There has been a shift of priorities, something in the National Security structure, since 1979, has relegated civilian life way at the bottom.

Audiofil her

***

Red. anm.: Videoserie (25 deler) av McKinneys orientering: "The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - A Citizens Response: Did the Commission Get it Right?" (Noen segment mangler...)

Anbefales!

*************************************************************************

Nafeez Ahmed - "Ties With Terror: The Continuity of Western-Al-Qaeda Relations in the Post-Cold War Period"

An accurate understanding of the history of US relations with the Afghan mujahideen who went on to join al-Qaeda’s international terrorist network is crucial to understanding the anatomy of international terrorism today.

I will attempt here to condense this history in order to capture some of its most striking and significant features. In doing so, I hope to demonstrate as fact a hypothesis that flies entirely in the face of the official narrative – that US relations with the mujahideen did not end with the Cold War, but on the contrary have continued to this day in the post-Cold War era; and that this subtle, hidden relationship contributes directly to the systematic undermining of national security, through the cultivation of the sources of international terrorism. Most importantly, I will show that this conclusion is based on reliable, credible sources from the public record. And further, I must emphasize, I will not delve into any form of theoretical speculation, but will concentrate solely on alerting you to verifiable information that can be subject to further investigation. (Emphasis added/uthevelse tilføyet)

I will divide this presentation into the following sections:

1. The Formation of al-Qaeda
2. The Utility of al-Qaeda Beyond Afghanistan
3. Al-Qaeda in the Balkans
4. Al-Qaeda in North Africa
5. Al-Qaeda in the Asia-Pacific
6. Al-Qaeda in the Caucasus
7. Conclusion

(...)

http://911blogger.com/node/2966

[googlevideo=http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-7800392480175286301]

Acceptance of the official narrative of what happened on September 11, 2001 has become widespread, not merely on the right, but also on the left. In this paper, I take issue with the writings of several commentators who attempt to forcefully argue firstly that acceptance of the official narrative is justified, and secondly that certain kinds of inquiry into anomalies and inconsistencies in that narrative are illegitimate and unnecessary. The main bulk of this writing is available online at a new section at the well-known progressive website ZNet, and is somewhat representative of the mainstream approach to 9/11.

In reviewing the work of these commentators on 9/11, I analyse in detail the failure of the U.S. intelligence community in preventing the Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks; the casual repression and/or misrepresentation of facts related to 9/11; the failure of U.S. defence measures on 9/11; the historic and institutional basis for skepticism about the official narrative; and some salient facts which illustrate the need for proper research into the linkages between U.S. government, military, intelligence, and corporate policy, and the ease with which the September 11 terrorist attacks went ahead. (Emphasis added/uthevelse tilføyet)