Info War: Obama Terrorized by CIA?

Here is where it starts to get scary. Or tinfoilly. Or just totally depressing.

Everyone here has some idea of just how bad the CIA has been over the decades since WW2. And none of us has any idea of how bad the CIA has been over the decades since WW2.

That is because everything the CIA does is secret, of course, but even more so because the CIA’s main mission is not covert ops or spying or information collecting. It is information distribution. Or more accurately disinformation distribution. Over 60 years a culture of secrecy, and layers and more layers of secrecy, a culture based on the control and analysis and marketing of information and disinformation has been established. Nominally this culture is about protecting the USA. But as anyone who has ever encountered a bureaucracy knows, a bureaucracies first job ALWAYS becomes preserving itself.

Besides their recent expedition into the land of state sponsored torture, the CIA has much to hide. (See below the fold) And…they get to hide it. From everyone. Including new presidents.

The CIA, an agency that controls a small army and nearly every shred of info on nearly everyone, that has overthrown governments, engaged in assassination and drug dealing, and blackmail, spied on Americans, and exceeded it’s charter in nearly every way possible, this same agency whose job it is to lie, disinform and coverup…has it’s ass on the line.

And this very same CIA…that in this case is in essence a defendant that might be tried and held accountable for it’s crimes during the past eight years where they were literally let off the leash by Bushco….

… the same agency that is giving the president briefings on what the CIA has done. This agency that literally has used massive government funding to seriously, with life and death urgency and ‘democracy preserving’ intensity, research, study and perfect lying and disinformation and make it into an art form….is the same agency whose is giving (dis)information on itself, torture, the state of the GWOT, and things like what should and should not be a state secret to Obama.

With it’s own ass on the line.

Who has oversight on the CIA? The Intelligence Committees that have proven themselves SO untrustworthy and weak over the last eight years. And that’s about it…other than the other alphabet soup of Intelligence agencies, all driving their own bureaucratic agendas. Would the CIA…gasp…use the techniques it has learned over the last 60 years of covert culture to influence and color the information that the president and Intel Committees receive on it? While it’s ass is on the line?

Which all begs the question….is the CIA, an agency dedicated to lying and disinformation, telling the president the truth? If they are not….how would he know?



Yes, I am grasping at straws to find someway to explain Obama/Holder’s indefensible betrayal on the state secret case. And no, I don’t really believe it myself. But perhaps….just perhaps…he is facing the same learning curve on the perfidy of the “Intellgence” Community as he is on dealing with Congressional Republicans. Maybe he can overcome the VERY powerful and underestimated influence of people whose job it is to spread disinformation….especially when it comes to itself.

The CIA’s Family Jewels

Here is a, believe it or not, brief list of CIA activities from Wikipedia

Communist states 1945-1989

The United States supported the overthrow of the Communist regimes in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. One example is the counter-espionage operations following the discovery of the Farewell dossier which some argue contributed to fall of Communism.[10][11] The National Endowment for Democracy supported pro-capitalist movements in the Communist states and has been accused of secretly supporting regime change, which it itself denies.[12][13][14] Many of the Eastern European states later turned to capitalism and joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

[edit] Iran 1953

   Main article: Operation Ajax

   See also: CIA Activities by Region: Near East, North Africa, South and Southwest Asia#Iran

In 1953, the CIA worked with the United Kingdom to overthrow the democratically-elected government[citation needed] of Iran led by Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh who had attempted to nationalize Iran’s oil, threatening the interests of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Declassified CIA documents show that Britain was fearful of Iran’s plans to nationalize its oil industry and pressed the U.S. to mount a joint operation to remove the prime minister.[15] In 1951 the Iranian parliament voted to nationalize the oil fields of the country. Anti-Communism had also risen to a fever pitch in Washington, and officials were worried that Iran might fall under the sway of the Soviet Union, a historical presence there. “The aim was to bring to power a government which would reach an equitable oil settlement, enabling Iran to become economically sound and financially solvent, and which would vigorously prosecute the dangerously strong Communist Party.”[15] Prime minister Mossadegh had dissolved the parliament, claiming massive support for the measure in a plebiscite and accepted the support of the Communist Tudeh party for his government, leading to U.S. fears of a Communist overthrow.[16]

The coup was led by CIA operative Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. (grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt). With help from British intelligence, the CIA planned, funded and implemented Operation Ajax.[17] The U.K. and U.S. boycott and other political pressures by both governments, together with a massive covert propaganda campaign in the months leading up to the coup created the environment necessary for success. The CIA hoped to plant articles in American newspapers saying that Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi’s return to govern Iran resulted from a homegrown revolt against a Communist-leaning government. This attempt to manipulate the U.S. media largely failed, although the CIA successfully used its contacts at the Associated Press to put on the news wire a statement from Tehran about royal decrees that the C.I.A. itself had written. The CIA hired Iranian assets who posed as Communists, harassed religious leaders and staged the bombing of one cleric’s home to turn the Islamic religious community against the government.[15]

The coup initially seemed to fail and the Shah (monarch) Mohammad Reza Pahlavi fled the country. After four days of rioting pro-shah army units and street crowds defeated Mossadeq’s forces and the Shah returned. According to the 1906 constitution he was a constitutional monarch who should rule together with the democratically-elected parliament, but after the coup he ruled autocratically, with little concern for democracy.[18][19]

The Shah was one of the most brutal dictators of his era.[20] The Shah’s brutal regime included a secret police, the SAVAK, allied and trained by the CIA, which routinely used torture, and is claimed to have destroyed any real possibility of the survival of an Iranian democratic counterforce to the ayatollahs’ ensuing clerical tyranny bred by the Shah’s blundering, martyring repression.[21] However, partially due to US pressure, he also attempted to modernzie Iran and introduced many social reforms (See the White Revolution).

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, in a speech on March 17, 2000 before the American-Iranian Council on the relaxation of U.S. sanctions against Iran, finally acknowledged:[22]

   In 1953, the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran’s popular prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh. The Dwight D. Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons, but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran’s political development and it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs. Moreover, during the next quarter century, the United States and the West gave sustained backing to the Shah’s regime. Although it did much to develop the country economically, the Shah’s government also brutally repressed political dissent. As President Bill Clinton has said, the United States must bear its fair share of responsibility for the problems that have arisen in U.S.-Iranian relations. Even in more recent years, aspects of U.S. policy toward Iraq during its conflict with Iran appear now to have been regrettably shortsighted, especially in light of our subsequent experiences with Saddam Hussein.

[edit] Italy 1953-1980s

   See also: Operation Gladio

   See also: Strategy of tension

[edit] Guatemala 1954

   Main article: Operation PBSUCCESS

   See also: CIA activities in the Americas#Guatemala 1954

[edit] Cuba 1959-

   Main articles: Bay of Pigs Invasion, The Cuban Project, Operation Mongoose, Operation Northwoods, and Cuba-United States relations

The largest and most complicated coup effort, approved at White House level, was the Bay of Pigs operation. Under initiatives by the Eisenhower and Kennedy Administrations, CIA trained Cuban anti-communist exiles and refugees to land in Cuba and attempt to overthrow the government of Fidel Castro. Plans originally formed under Eisenhower were scaled back under Kennedy.

The CIA made many attempts to assassinate Castro, often with White House approval, as in Operation Mongoose.

[edit] Democratic Republic of the Congo 1960

Patrice Émery Lumumba, an African anti-colonial leader and the first legally elected Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, after he helped to win its independence from Belgium in June 1960, was deposed in a US CIA-sponsored coup during the Congo Crisis.[23] He was subsequently imprisoned and assassinated under controversial circumstances.

[edit] Iraq 1963

   See also: CIA activities in Iraq

In 1963, the United States is claimed to have backed a coup against the government of Iraq headed by General Abdel Karim Kassem, who five years earlier had deposed the Western-allied Iraqi monarchy. The CIA helped the new Baath Party government in ridding the country of suspected leftists and Communists.[24][25][26][27]

To pave the way for the new regime, the CIA is claimed to have provided to the Baathists lists of suspected Communists and other leftists. The new regime is claimed to have used these lists to orchestrate a bloodbath, systematically murdering untold numbers of Iraq’s educated elite–killings in which Saddam Hussein himself is said to have participated. The victims included hundreds of doctors, teachers, technicians, lawyers and other professionals as well as military and political figures.[25][28][29] According to an article in the New York Times, the U.S. sent arms to the new regime, weapons later used against the same Kurdish insurgents the U.S. supported against Kassem and then abandoned. American and U.K. oil and other interests, including Mobil, British Petroleum and Bechtel, were once again conducting business in Iraq.[25]

[edit] Brazil 1964

   Main article: 1964 Brazilian coup d’état

   See also: CIA activities in Brazil

[edit] Greece 1967

   Further information: Greek military junta of 1967-1974

The Greek military junta is claimed to have been supported by the US.

[edit] Iraq 1968

The leader of the new Baathist government, Salam Arif, died in 1966 and his brother, Abdul Rahman Arif, not a Ba’athist, assumed the presidency.[21][25] Said K. Abuirsh alleges that in 1967, the government of Iraq was very close to giving concessions for the development of huge new oil fields in the country to France and the USSR. PBS reported that Robert Anderson, former secretary of the treasury under President Dwight D. Eisenhower, secretly met with the Ba’ath Party and came to a negotiated agreement according to which both the oil field concessions and sulphur mined in the northern part of the country would go to United States companies if the Ba’ath again took over power.[30] In 1968, with a claimed backing of the CIA, Rahman Arif was overthrown by Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr of the Baath Party, bringing Saddam Hussein to the threshold of power.[21][25][24][27]

Roger Morris in the Asia Times writes that the CIA deputy for the Middle East Archibald Roosevelt (grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt and cousin of Kermit Roosevelt, Jr.) stated, referring to Iraqi Ba’ath Party officers on his payroll in the 1963 and 1968 coups, “They’re our boys, bought and paid for, but you always gotta remember that these people can’t be trusted.”[21] General Ahmed Bakr was installed as president. Saddam Hussein was appointed the number two man.[30][21]

[edit] Chile 1973

   Main article: United States intervention in Chile

The role of the US in the coup and the events before this is disputed.

[edit] Afghanistan 1973-74

Roger Morris, writing in the Asia Times, argues that as early as 1973-74, the CIA began offering covert backing to Islamic radical rebels in Afghanistan premised on the claim that the right-wing, authoritarian government headed by Mohammed Daoud Khan, might prove a likely instrument of Soviet military aggression in South Asia. Morris argues that this premise was without basis in fact; Daoud had always held the Russians, his main patron when it came to aid, at arm’s length, and had savagely purged local communists who supported him when he overthrew the Afghan monarchy in 1973. The Soviets had also shown no inclination to use the notoriously unruly Afghans and their army for any expansionist aim.[21] Morris claims that during this period U.S. foreign policy leaders saw the Soviets as always being “on the march.” This apprehension resulted in a rash of U.S. secret wars, assassinations, terrorist acts and manifold corruptions. U.S. secret backing of radical Islamic rebels ceased following an abortive rebel uprising in 1975.[21]

The Black Book of Communism argues that Daoud relied on Communist army officials in order to carry out the coup. After the coup, at the instigation of Communists a wave of repression was unleashed. However, he got rid of the Communists in the government in 1975 and after that his days were numbered. The Soviet Union had no intention of letting Afghanistan escape from Soviet influence.[31]

[edit] Argentina 1976

   Main article: 1976 Argentine coup d’état

   See also: Dirty War#US involvement

[edit] Afghanistan 1978-1980s

Roger Morris, writing in the Asia Times, states that in April 1978, the crackdown by the regime of Daoud on Afghanistan’s small Communist Party provoked a successful coup by Communist Party loyalists in the army. The coup occurred in defiance of a skittish Moscow, which had stopped earlier coup plans.

According to Morris, by autumn 1978, an Islamic insurgency, armed and planned by the U.S., Pakistan, Iran and China, and soon to be actively supported, at Washington’s prodding, by the Saudis and Egyptians, was fighting in eastern Afghanistan. U.S. planners continued funding the radical Islamic insurgency to “suck” the Russians into Afghanistan.[21] According to the “Progressive South Asia Exchange Net”, claiming to cite an article in Le Nouvel Observateur, U.S. policy, unbeknownst even to the Mujahideen, was part of a larger strategy “to induce a Soviet military intervention.” National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski stated:

   According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Soviets into the Afghan trap…. The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter “We now have the opportunity of giving to the Soviet Union its Vietnam War.”[32]

The Black Book of Communism instead puts the blame on the Soviet Union who feared that Afghanistan was escaping its domination. There was little Muslim extremism before the Communist coup. After the coup, according to the Black Book, several antireligous campaigns by the Communist regime, as well as the harsh repressions, soon caused a fierce insurgency. The director of the infamous Pol-e-Charki prison stated “We’ll leave only 1 million Afghans alive – that’s all we need to build socialism.”[33] The claim in the Black Book that there was little Islamic insurgency before the coup is not necessarily inconsistent with the notion that the U.S. government organized the Islamic insurgency to lure in the Soviets to quell the instability in the country.

With instability and bloody civil strife raging in a country on their border, the Soviets invaded in December 1979, according to the Asia Times report, fulfilling the hopes of Washington as expressed by National Security Adviser Brzezinski.[21][34]

The Black Book of Communism states approximately 100,000 people had been killed by the Communists before the Soviet Invasion. It argues that one of the primary reasons for the Soviet Invasion and murder of the Communist President Hafizullah Amin was that he had began to show signs of independence from Moscow’s control.[35]

The CIA provided assistance to the fundamentalist insurgents through the Pakistani secret services, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), in a program called Operation Cyclone. Somewhere between $3-$20 billion in U.S. funds were funneled into the country to train and equip troops with weapons, including Stinger surface-to-air missiles.[36][37] On July 20, 1987, the withdrawal of Soviet troops from the country was announced pursuant to the negotiations that led to the Geneva Accords of 1988.[38]

The people of Afghanistan suffered enormously in the war, with one and a half million died during more than a quarter-century of war and unrest. Morris claims that this was a continuing catastrophe beyond any other in the history of nation-states.[21][39] Five million Afghan people, one third of the prewar population of the country, were made refugees in Pakistan and Iran, and an additional two million Afghans were forced by the war to migrate within the country. In the 1980s, one out of two refugees in the world was an Afghan.[40] The Black Book of Communism states that the Communists were the side most responsible for the deaths and that such high death tolls were not unusual in Communist regimes. For example the Khmer Rouge killed proportionately more than of the population than was the case in Afghanistan.[41] The Black Book of Communism is controversial and has been criticized for being one-sided in its review of Communist regimes, and for attributing victims to Communist regimes that were not victims of Communism at all so that the Book can arrive at a set target of total victims.[42][43][44][45]

The United States role in arming, training, and supporting the radical Islamic terrorist group, the Mujihadeen of Afghanistan in the 1980s, has been called the model for state-sponsored terrorism, and led to a new generation of regime change actions around the world by this group and its off-shoots. This guerrilla movement, initially intended to oust the Soviet Union from Afghanistan, gave rise to terrorist groups in nations such as Indonesia, the Philippines, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Chechnya, and the former Yugoslavia, with a view to bring about regime change along Islamic lines.[46] The early foundations of al-Qaida were built in part on relationships and weaponry that came from the billions of dollars in U.S. support for the Afghan mujahadin during the war to expel Soviet forces from that country.[47] Some of the Afghan-trained “freedom fighters” were later involved in terrorist acts against the U.S., the very government that had given them support in the early days of their organization, to change U.S. policy in the Middle East. The initial bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, the attacks on the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the attack on the USS Cole, and the attacks of 11 September all have been linked to individuals and groups that at one time were armed and trained by the United States and/or its allies.[46] The perpetrators of the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 used a manual written by the CIA for the Mujihadeen fighters in Afghanistan on how to make explosives. Sheik Abul Rahman, one of the conspirators in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, was allowed to come to the U.S. to recruit Arab-Americans to fight in Afghanistan against the Soviets.[48]

[edit] Iran 1980

Anarchist Z magazine claims that in June 1980, students in Iran revealed a 1980 memorandum from U.S. National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski to Secretary of State Cyrus Vance recommending the “destabilization” of the Iranian government by using Iran’s neighbors. The U.S. has denied that it gave Iraq a “green light” for its September 22, 1980 invasion of Iran. Five months before Iraq’s invasion, on April 14, 1980, Zbigniew Brzezinski, signaled the U.S.’s willingness to work with Iraq: “We see no fundamental incompatibility of interests between the United States and Iraq… we do not feel that American- Iraqi relations need to be frozen in antagonisms.” According to Iran’s president at the time, Abolhassan Banisadr, Brzezinski met directly with Saddam Hussein in Jordan two months before the Iraqi assault. Bani-Sadr wrote, “Brzezinski had assured Saddam Hussein that the United States would not oppose the separation of Khuzestan [in southwest Iran] from Iran.” Journalist Robert Parry states that in a secret 1981 memo summing up a trip to the Middle East, then-Secretary of State Alexander Haig wrote: “It was also interesting to confirm that President Carter gave the Iraqis a green light to launch the war against Iran through Prince Fahd” of Jordan.”[49] The Financial Times reported that the U.S. passed satellite intelligence to the regime of Saddam Hussein via third countries, leading Iraq to believe Iranian forces would quickly collapse if attacked. Z magazine therefore argues that it is likely therefore that the U.S. helped push Saddam Hussein to attack Iran, causing a long and bloody war.[49]

Author Kenneth R. Timmerman and former Iranian President Abol Hassan Bani-Sadr argue separately that Brzezinski met with Hussein in July 1980 in Amman, Jordan, to discuss joint efforts to oppose Iran. According to Hussein biographer Said Aburish however, at the Amman meeting Saddam Hussein met with three CIA agents, not Brzezinski personally. Former Carter official Gary Sick denies that Washington directly encouraged Iraq’s attack, but instead let “Saddam assume there was a U.S. green light because there was no explicit red light.”[50]

A review of thousands of declassified government documents and interviews with former U.S. policymakers shows that U.S. intelligence and logistical support played a crucial role in arming Iraq. The administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous dual use items that had both military and civilian applications, including poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and bubonic plague. Opinions differ among Middle East experts and former government officials about the pre-Iraqi tilt, and whether Washington could have done more to stop the flow to Baghdad of technology for building weapons of mass destruction. “Fundamentally, the policy was justified,” argues David Newton, a former U.S. ambassador to Baghdad, who runs an anti-Hussein radio station in Prague. “We were concerned that Iraq should not lose the war with Iran, because that would have threatened Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. Our long-term hope was that Hussein’s government would become less repressive and more responsible.” Although U.S. arms manufacturers were not as deeply involved as German or British companies in selling weaponry to Iraq, the Reagan administration effectively turned a blind eye to the export of “dual use” items such as chemical precursors and steel tubes that can have military and civilian applications. According to several former officials, the State and Commerce departments promoted trade in such items as a way to boost U.S. exports and acquire political leverage over Hussein. “Everybody was wrong in their assessment of Saddam,” said Joe Wilson, Glaspie’s former deputy at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, and the last U.S. official to meet with Hussein. “Everybody in the Arab world told us that the best way to deal with Saddam was to develop a set of economic and commercial relationships that would have the effect of moderating his behavior. History will demonstrate that this was a miscalculation.”[51]

According to reports of the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, the U.S., under the successive presidential administrations sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992. The chairman of the Senate committee, Don Riegle, said: “The executive branch of our government approved 771 different export licences for sale of dual-use technology to Iraq. I think its a devastating record.”[52]

The U.S. also claimed to have provided critical battle planning assistance at a time when U.S. intelligence agencies knew that Iraqi commanders would employ chemical weapons in waging the war, according to senior military officers with direct knowledge of the program. The U.S. claimed to have carried out the covert program at a time when Secretary of State George P. Shultz, Secretary of Defense Frank C. Carlucci and National Security Adviser General Colin L. Powell were publicly condemning Iraq for its use of poison gas, especially after Iraq attacked Kurdish villagers in Halabja in March 1988. U.S. officials publicly condemned Iraq’s employment of mustard gas, sarin, VX and other poisonous agents, but sixty Defense Intelligence Agency officers were secretly providing detailed information on Iranian deployments, tactical planning for battles, plans for airstrikes and bomb-damage assessments for Iraq. It has long been known that the U.S. provided intelligence assistance, such as satellite photography, to Saddam’s regime. Carlucci said: “My understanding is that what was provided” to Iraq “was general order of battle information, not operational intelligence.” “I certainly have no knowledge of U.S. participation in preparing battle and strike packages,” he said, “and doubt strongly that that occurred.” “I did agree that Iraq should not lose the war, but I certainly had no foreknowledge of their use of chemical weapons.” Secretary of State Powell, through a spokesman, said the officers’ description of the program was “dead wrong,” but declined to discuss it. His deputy, Richard L. Armitage, a senior defense official at the time, used an expletive relayed through a spokesman to indicate his denial that the United States acquiesced in the use of chemical weapons.[53]

Others have instead claimed U.S. intelligence agencies manipulated both sides in the Iran-Iraq war, providing each country with “deliberately distorted or inaccurate intelligence data”. One method mentioned was altering satellite photos. In “Veil,” his study of CIA covert operations in the 1980s, Bob Woodward found that some CIA officials were “doling out tactical data to both sides” to engineer a stalemate.[50]

[edit] Turkey 1980

   Main article: 1980 Turkish coup d’état

The right-wing coup of 1980 was supported by the United States.[54]

[edit] Nicaragua 1981-1990

   Main article: Political history of Nicaragua

1981-90: CIA directs Contra revolution, plants harbor mines and sinks civilian ships to overthrow the revolutionary Sandinista government of Nicaragua. After the Boland Amendment was enacted, it became illegal under U.S. law to fund the Contras; National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, Deputy National Security Adviser Admiral John Poindexter, National Security Council staffer Col. Oliver North and others continued an illegal operation to fund the Contras, leading to the Iran-Contra scandal. The U.S argued that:[55]

   The United States initially provided substantial economic assistance to the Sandinista-dominated regime. We were largely instrumental in the OAS action delegitimizing the Somoza regime and laying the groundwork for installation for the new junta. Later, when the Sandinista role in the Salvadoran conflict became clear, we sought through a combination of private diplomatic contacts and suspension of assistance to convince Nicaragua to halt its subversion. Later still, economic measures and further diplomatic efforts were employed to try to effect changes in Sandinista behavior.

   Nicaragua’s neighbors have asked for assistance against Nicaraguan aggression, and the United States has responded. Those countries have repeatedly and publicly made clear that they consider themselves to be the victims of aggression from Nicaragua, and that they desire United States assistance in meeting both subversive attacks and the conventional threat posed by the relatively immense Nicaraguan Armed Forces.

[edit] Republic of Ghana

On February 24, 1966, Prime Minister Kwame Nkrumah of the Ghana was overthrown by a claimed CIA-backed coup.[56][57]

[edit] Since the end of the Cold War

[edit] Iraq 1992-1995

According to former U.S. intelligence officials interviewed by the New York Times, the CIA orchestrated a bomb and sabotage campaign between 1992 and 1995 in Iraq via one of the insurgent organizations, the Iraqi National Accord, led by Iyad Allawi. The campaign had no apparent effect in toppling Saddam Hussein’s rule.[58]

According to the Iraqi government at the time, and former CIA officer Robert Baer, the bombing campaign against Baghdad included both government and civilian targets. According to this former CIA official, the civilian targets included a movie theater and a bombing of a school bus and schoolchildren were killed. No public records of the secret bombing campaign are known to exist, and the former U.S. officials said their recollections were in many cases sketchy, and in some cases contradictory. “But whether the bombings actually killed any civilians could not be confirmed because, as a former CIA official said, the United States had no significant intelligence sources in Iraq then.” The Iraqi government at the time claimed that the bombs, including one it said exploded in a movie theater, resulted in many civilian casualties. In 1996, Amneh al-Khadami, who described himself as the chief bomb maker for the Iraqi National Accord, recorded a videotape in which he talked of the bombing campaign and complained that he was being shortchanged money and supplies. Two former intelligence officers confirmed the existence of the videotape. Mr. Khadami said that “we blew up a car, and we were supposed to get $2,000” but got only $1,000, as reported in 1997 by the British newspaper The Independent, which had obtained a copy of the videotape.[58] The campaign was directed by CIA asset Dr. Iyad Allawi,[59] later installed as interim prime minister by the U.S.-led coalition that invaded Iraq in 2003.

[edit] Guatemala 1993

In 1993 the CIA helped in overthrowing Jorge Serrano Elías. Jorge then attempted a self-coup, suspended the constitution, dissolved Congress and the Supreme Court, and imposed censorship. He was replaced by Ramiro de León Carpio.[60]

[edit] Zimbabwe 2000s

Robert Mugabe accused the United States of trying to remove him in a potentially illegal regime change.[61][62][63]

[edit] Serbia 2000

The United States is alleged to have made secret effort to topple the dictator Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia. The 5 October Revolution removed Miloševi? and installed a democratic government.[64][65]

[edit] Venezuela 2002

   Main article: 2002 Venezuelan coup d’état attempt

In 2002, Washington is claimed to have approved and supported a coup against the democratically-elected Venezuelan government, acting through senior officials of the U.S. government, including Special Envoy to Latin America Otto Reich and convicted Iran-contra figure and George W. Bush “democracy ‘czar'” Elliott Abrams, who have long histories in the U.S. backed “Dirty Wars” of the 1980s in Central America, and links to U.S.-supported death squads working in Central America at that time.[66] Top coup plotters, including Pedro Carmona, the man installed during the coup as the new president, began visits to the White House months before the coup and continued until weeks before the putsch. The plotters were received at the White House by the man President George W. Bush tasked to be his key policy-maker for Latin America, Special Envoy Otto Reich.[66] It has been claimed that Reich was the U.S. mastermind of the coup.[67]

Former U.S. Navy intelligence officer Wayne Madsen, told the British newspaper the Guardian that American military attaches had been in touch with members of the Venezuelan military to explore the possibility of a coup. “I first heard of Lieutenant Colonel James Rogers [the assistant military attache now based at the U.S. embassy in Caracas] going down there last June [2001] to set the ground,” Mr. Madsen reported, adding: “Some of our counter-narcotics agents were also involved.” He claims the U.S. Navy assisted with signals intelligence as the coup played out and helped by jamming communications for the Venezuelan military, focusing on jamming communications to and from the diplomatic missions in Caracas. The U.S. embassy dismissed the allegations as “ridiculous”.[68]

The U.S. also funded opposition groups in the year leading up to the coup, channeling hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants to U.S. and Venezuelan groups opposed to President Hugo Chavez, including the labor group whose protests sparked off the coup. The funds were provided by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED),[68] a nonprofit organization whose roots, according to an article in Slate trace back to the late 1960s when the public learned of CIA machinations to covertly fund parties and activists opposing the Soviets. Congress created the NED in 1983 which disburses money to pro-democracy groups around the globe and do so openly.[69] The State Department is now examining whether one or more recipients of the NED money may have actively plotted against the Venezuelan government.[68]

Bush Administration officials and anonymous sources acknowledged meeting with some of the planners of the coup in the several weeks prior to April 11, but have strongly denied encouraging the coup itself, saying that they insisted on constitutional means.[70] Because of allegations, Sen. Christopher Dodd requested a review of U.S. activities leading up to and during the coup attempt. A U.S. State Department Office of Inspector General report found no “wrongdoing” by U.S. officials either in the State Department or in the U.S. Embassy.[71]

[edit] Georgia, 2003

There are allegations from Russia that the United States supported the Rose Revolution, which installed a pro-US government.[72][73]

[edit] Ukraine, 2004

There are allegations from Russia that the United States supported the Orange revolution, which installed a pro-US government.[72][73]

[edit] Equatorial Guinea 2004

Zimbabwe has accused the United States of involvement in a 2004 attempted coup against Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, dictator of Equatorial Guinea.[74]

[edit] Lebanon 2005

The Cedar Revolution is claimed to have been supported by the US.[75]

[edit] Palestinian Authority, 2006-Present

An Asia Times Online article by Mark Perry and Alastair Crooke states that since at least January 2006, the United States has supplied guns, ammunition and training to Palestinian Fatah group (which won the Palestinian presidential election, 2005) in order to overthrow the Hamas government elected in the Palestinian legislative election, 2006. Apparently headed up by Elliott Abrams, the U.S. supply of rifles and ammunition, which started as a mere trickle, has become a torrent and a large number of Fatah men have been trained at two West Bank camps to attack Hamas supporters in the streets. The Israeli daily newspaper Ha’aretz reported that the U.S. has designated an astounding US$86.4 million for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ security detail. The article states that U.S. arming of Fatah continued even though some officials predicted that it could lead to a Palestinian civil war, which would be an unwelcome development by most countries of the region. An anonymous official stated: “Who the hell outside of Washington wants to see a civil war among Palestinians?” Also according to the article, Elliott Abrams had also publicly advocated a “hard coup” against the newly elected Hamas government, but U.S. spokesmen later dismissed these remarks as due to momentary frustration. CIA, the US military, and Israel have been critical. Officially the support is for “assist[ing] the Palestinian Authority presidency in fulfilling PA commitments under the roadmap to dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism and establish law and order in the West Bank and Gaza”[76]

Hamas Foreign Minister Dr. Mahmoud al-Zahar has called the arming of Fatah by the United States an “American coup d’état” against the democratically-elected Palestinian government.[77] Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization by many Western nations.[citation needed]

BBC states that after months of street fighting in which hundreds of Palestinians were killed and the Gaza Strip were seized by the Hamas armed forces, (see Battle of Gaza (2007)), Palestinian Authority President and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas dismissed the Hamas-led government in June 2007, and a new unelected “emergency cabinet,” led by Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, was sworn in in place of the Hamas government in the West Bank.[78]

[edit] Somalia 2006-2007

Although the United States has had an ongoing interest in Somalia for decades, in early 2006 the CIA began a program of funding a coalition of anti-Islamic warlords.[79] This involved the support of CIA case workers operating out of the Nairobi, Kenya office funneling payments of hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Alliance for the Restoration of Peace and Counter-Terrorism. As the power balance shifted towards this alliance, the CIA program backfired and the militias of the Islamic Court Union (ICU) gained control of the country. Although the ICU was locally supported for having restored a relative level of peace[80] to the volatile region after having defeated the CIA-funded Alliance for the Restoration of Peace and Counter-Terrorism in the Second Battle of Mogadishu, concerns about the growth and popular support for an Islamic country during the United States’ War on Terror led to a new approach of the intervention of CIA, the United States military and Ethiopia’s dominantly Christian government.

In late December 2006 a United States-trained[81] and funded Ethiopian Military force attacked militias of the ICU in a series of battles known as the War in Somalia.

The use of the Ethiopian Army was seen by the United States as an awkward, but necessary way to prevent Somalia from being ruled by an Islamic government unsympathetic to American interests. In December 2006 State Department officials were issued internal guidelines and talking points such as “The press must not be allowed to make this about Ethiopia, or Ethiopia violating the territorial integrity of Somalia…”[79] Because of Ethiopia’s known human rights abuses such as the massacre of 193 protesters after the 2005 presidential elections, there is conflict between the strategic interest Ethiopia’s army and leadership provides in the War on Terror and the human rights this war is allegedly addressing. This conflict has manifested itself in the United States Congress where the Ethiopia Democracy and Accountability Act of 2007, calls for the millions of foreign aid to Ethiopia only be delivered if there are significant improvements in the democracy and human rights in that country. The Bush Administration and Samuel Assefa, Ethiopia’s ambassador to the US are strongly opposed to the bill.[82]

[edit] Venezuela 2007

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2007)

Venezuela claims that a confidential memorandum from the US embassy to the CIA revealed and circulated by the Venezuelan government on November 26, 2007 provides details on the activity of a CIA unit engaged in clandestine action to destabilize the forth-coming national referendum and to coordinate the civil and military overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Venezuela. According to the Venezuelan government, the memo, entitled “Advancing to the Last Phase of Operation Pincer,” was sent by Michael Middleton Steere addressed to the Director of CIA, Michael Hayden, and outlines covert Operation Pincer (OP) (Operación Tenaza).[83]

According to these claims, Operation Pincer entails a two-pronged strategy of impeding the upcoming national referendum of December 2, 2007 on important changes to the Venezuelan constitution urged by the government of President Hugo Chavez, rejecting the outcome, and at the same time calling for a ‘no’ vote. In the run up to the referendum, OP includes running phony polls, attacking electoral officials and running propaganda through the private media accusing the government of fraud and calling for a ‘no’ vote. Contradictions, the report emphasizes, are of no matter.[83]

According to these claims, the most dangerous threats to Venezuelan democracy urged by the US Embassy memo are the mobilization of students at private university, backed by top administrators, to attack key government buildings including the Presidential Palace, Supreme Court and the National Electoral Council. The US Embassy provided $8 million dollars in propaganda alone, according to the Embassy memo, to shape the university students’ views; the right-wing opposition and the business elite through free air time on the private right-wing media, have organized a majority of the upper middle class students from the private universities, backed by the Catholic Church hierarchy. The Embassy is especially full of praise for the ex-Maoist group for its violent street fighting activity. Ironically, small Trotskyist sects and their trade unionists join the ex-Maoists in opposing the constitutional amendments.[83]

According to these claims, the ultimate objective of Operation Pincer as outlined in the memo is to seize a territorial or institutional base with “massive support” of the defeated electoral minority within three or four days, presumably after the elections, backed by an uprising by oppositionist military officers principally in the National Guard. The Embassy operative concede that the military plotters have run into serious problems as key intelligence operatives were detected, stores of arms were decommissioned and several plotters are under tight surveillance. Apart from the deep involvement of the US, the primary organization of the Venezuelan business elite (FEDECAMARAS), as well as all the major private television, radio and newspaper outlets have been engaged in a campaign of fear and intimidation campaign against the referendum and any results thereof.[83]

The neutrality of this article is disputed.

Please see the discussion on the talk page. (January 2008)

Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved.

The US has called Venezuelan accusations of a CIA conspiracy “ridiculous”.[84] According to the International Herald Tribune, Benjamin Ziff, an embassy spokesman said:[85] “We reject and are disappointed in the Venezuelan government’s allegations that the United States is involved in any type of conspiracy to affect the outcome of the constitutional referendum.”

A CIA spokesman called the memo “a fake”, while some independent analysts and researchers doubt its authenticity.[85] Jeremy Bigwood, an independent researcher in Washington, said “I find the document quite suspect. There’s not an original version in English, and the timing of its release is strange. Everything about it smells bad.”[86]

[edit] Iran 2001-present

The United States is alleged to have targeted Iran and several other Muslim countries for regime change starting at least in 2001. The book War and Decision written by Undersecretary of Defence for Policy Douglas Feith quotes a high level government policy memorandum written after September 11, 2001, stating that the United States should “[c]apitalize on our strong suit, which is not finding a few hundred terrorists in caves in Afghanistan, but in the vastness of our military and humanitarian resources, which can strengthen the opposition forces in terrorist-supporting states.”[87] The memorandum outlined a list of military actions to be undertaken against some of these states. Undersecretary Feith and Gen. Wesley Clark confirmed that Iran is on this list.

[edit] U.S. commando units

The Asia Times cites a New Yorker Magazine’s investigative report, according to which the U.S. has military commando units operating inside Iran.[88] That same article in Asia Times reported that U.S. policy is one of lighting “the fire of ethnic and sectarian strife” to destabilize and eventually topple the government of Iran. The Washington Quarterly magazine as cited by the Asia Times article, reported:

   the Sunni Balochi resistance could prove valuable to Western intelligence agencies with an interest in destabilizing the hardline regime in Tehran… The United States maintained close contacts with the Balochis till 2001, at which point it withdrew support when Tehran promised to repatriate any U.S. airmen who had to land in Iran as a result of damage sustained in combat operations in Afghanistan.[88]

[edit] Jundullah militants

ABC news reported, citing U.S. and Pakistani intelligence sources, that U.S. officials have been secretly encouraging and advising a Pakistani Balochi militant group named Jundullah that is responsible for a series of deadly guerrilla raids inside Iran. The Jundullah militants “stage attacks across the border into Iran on Iranian military officers, Iranian intelligence officers, kidnapping them, executing them on camera,” This militant group is led by a youthful leader, Abd el Malik Regi, sometimes known as “Regi.” The U.S. provides no direct funding to the group, which would require an official presidential order or “presidential finding” as well as congressional oversight. Tribal sources tell ABC News that money for Jundullah is funneled to Abd el Malik Regi through Iranian exiles who have connections with European and Gulf states. A CIA spokesperson said “the account of alleged CIA action is false,” and reiterated that the U.S. provides no funding of the Jundullah group.[89] Regi and Jundullah are also suspected of being associated with al Qaida, a charge that the group has denied. Jundullah “is a vicious Salafi organization whose followers attended the same madrassas as the Taliban and Pakistani extremists,” sccording to Professor Vali Nasr, “They are suspected of having links to Al Qaeda and they are also thought to be tied to the drug culture.”[90] Regi “used to fight with the Taliban. He’s part drug smuggler, part Taliban, part Sunni activist,” said Alexis Debat, a senior fellow on counterterrorism at the Nixon Center and an ABC News consultant who recently met with Pakistani officials and tribal members. “Regi is essentially commanding a force of several hundred guerrilla fighters that stage attacks across the border into Iran on Iranian military officers, Iranian intelligence officers, kidnapping them, executing them on camera,” Debat said. Most recently, Jundullah took credit for an attack in February that killed at least 11 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard riding on a bus in the Iranian city of Zahedan.[89]

The Baluchis militants accuse the government of discriminatory and repressive policies. Hossein Ali Shahriari, the representative from Zahedan in Parliament, said the attack had been carried out by “insurgents and smugglers who are led by the world imperialism,” a common reference to the United States and Britain.[91]

[edit] Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan

Another claimed US proxy inside Iran has been the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PEJAK). The New Yorker reported in November 2006 that a U.S. government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon civilian leadership leaked the news of secret US support for PEJAK for operations inside Iran, stating that the group had been given “a list of targets inside Iran of interest to the U.S.”.[92]

[edit] People’s Mujahedin of Iran

Another alleged terrorist group protected by the United States operates out of Iraq. The People’s Mujahedin of Iran, PMOI, known also as the Mujahedeen-e Khalq or MEK is dedicated to the overthrow of the Iranian regime and is accused of orchestrating a series of bombings inside Iran, including one attack that left the current supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, partially paralyzed. [93] The United States military has protected the PMOI inside its military camp and on supply runs to Baghdad.[citation needed] Since 1997, the U.S. lists the group as a terrorist organization.

   They’re terrorists only when we consider them terrorists. They might be terrorists in everybody else’s books . . . . It was a strange group of people and the leadership was extremely cruel and extremely vicious.”

said Lawrence Wilkerson, former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s chief of staff.[94]

[edit] Myanmar (Burma), 2007

Myanmar’s junta has stated that nationwide monk protests, which took place in August and September, were the results of timely collaborated plots of “a Western power” and antigovernment groups aiming to install a puppet government in the country. The Myanmar junta used to refer to the United States as “a Western power”


Skip to comment form

  1. Photobucket

    I can haz new Church Committee plz?

  2. I know the CIA list is long, but it’d help (me) if it was a bulleted list or something other than the entire Wikipedia. May as well just post a link. 🙂

  3. And I don’t necessarily think you need a tin foil hat to make assumptions about what might be going on behind the scenes. Whether its disinformation they’re giving the president, or tangles of lives/governments that are on the line in the decisions Obama/Holder/Panetta will have to make – this is one of the main places where the push-back will come from as the MIC is challenged. Its what I was referring to when I said this.

    And finally, do we believe that the power of the people is strong enough to challenge the entrenched dominators? I don’t think we know yet and frankly, sometimes I’m scared about the kind of reaction we’ll find as we get close. But I’m willing to take a chance on it. Because for me, everything else is meaningless if democracy/partnership isn’t possible.

    The depth of sinister activities is overwhelming. I, for one, am ready to give Obama more than 3 weeks to try and figure out what it is possible to do about all that.  

  4. establishments and we all know how that turned out.  They’re far more powerful now than they were then, and so are the economic elites.

    This country is in the deepest shit it’s ever been in, and Obama can’t or won’t take on the people who got us into this.  We’ll never get real change unless a lot of pissed off Americans get into the streets, if everything keeps going to hell, we just might see that.  

  5. They’re good at causing plane crashes, too.  It’s not just a little scary, but a lot scary.

    Things get more and more curious!  Check out Cheney’s new home — a 10 minute walk to the CIA headquarters (the large patch of green on the map) — the red star is Cheney’s home!!

    Here’s a video of Cheney’s new home, if you’re interested! (The house is at the end of the video.)

    Yep, buhdy, I’d say you might just be onto something!!!!!

  6. Gen. Petraeus (Betrayus is correct), who is now going to make a presidential run in 2012.  

    He lied to the media about Obama’s plans for withdrawal from Iraq were.

    Petraeus Leaked Misleading Story On Pullout Plans

    By Gareth Porter, Inter Press Service

    WASHINGTON, Feb 9 (IPS) – The political maneuvering between President Barack Obama and his top field commanders over withdrawal from Iraq has taken a sudden new turn with the leak by CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus – and a firm denial by a White House official – of an account of the Jan. 21 White House meeting suggesting that Obama had requested three different combat troop withdrawal plans with their respective associated risks, including one of 23 months.

    The Petraeus account, reported by McClatchy newspapers Feb. 5 and then by the Associated Press the following day, appears to indicate that Obama is moving away from the 16-month plan he had vowed during the campaign to implement if elected. But on closer examination, it doesn’t necessarily refer to any action by Obama or to anything that happened at the Jan. 21 meeting.

    The real story of the leak by Petraeus is that the most powerful figure in the U.S. military has tried to shape the media coverage of Obama and combat troop withdrawal from Iraq to advance his policy agenda – and, very likely, his personal political interests as well.

    This writer became aware of Petraeus’s effort to influence the coverage of Obama’s unfolding policy on troop withdrawal when a military source close to the general, who insisted on anonymity, offered the Petraeus account on Feb. 4. The military officer was responding to the IPS story ‘Generals Seek to Reverse Obama Withdrawal Decision’ published two days earlier. . . .

    The source also said Petraeus, Odierno and Ambassador Ryan Crocker had already reached a “unified assessment” on the three drawdown options and had forwarded them to the chain of command.

    But a White House official told IPS Monday that the Petraeus account was untrue. “The assessments of the three drawdown dates were not requested by the president,” said the official, who insisted on not being identified because he had not been authorised to comment on the matter. “He never said, ‘Give me three drawdown plans’.” . . .


    • OPOL on February 11, 2009 at 00:25

    Just deal with the world in an honest and straightforward fashion?

    What would be the harm in not having any more secrets?  Would it be the end of the world?  Would China gobble us up?  Would the terrorists win?

    Would the lizard people come for us?

  7. Or one locus of power?  

    And, eh…if your larger goal is to succeed as president of the United States, and accomplish whatever putative good you can in that role, why on earth would you do anything but hold the line on a potentially headline grabbing lawsuit? Because, after all, your guys are good, right?  And you are, you tell yourself, trying for larger systemic change, and these pesky little lawsuits are just going to make that harder, maybe.  Certainly they aren’t going to help with immediate political goals.

    He didn’t promise, or show any interest in, dismantling the empire. He is well travelled, a sophisticate in many ways, and I expect he has a very good idea of the deal, if not every particular.  He knows exactly what the gap is between America on teevee and the people who get stuffed on airplanes and tortured in faraway places.  Maybe he’ll fix some of that, or try.  He might even try hard.  But I suspect every action from principle is going through a hard filter of expedience, at this point.


  8. belie  a power(s) underneath…….

    and that group is truly invisible to us……

    the goals of those people no longer contain the well being of life if they ever did…….

    never the less they are actually dominant in the world we see……

    we must walk away…….

    nothing else will do….

Comments have been disabled.