SearchRecent comments
Democracy LinksMember's Off-site Blogs |
covert regime change....List of 64 U.S. Coups During 1947-1989 This is the list of U.S. coups during the Cold War that’s presented in the highly regarded 2018 academic book COVERT REGIME CHANGE, by Lindsey O’Rourke. (Only the start-date for each coup is shown here, but some of these coups went on for years; 39% succeeded at Government-overthrow, 61% did not. This list is taken from “Table 1.1: U.S.-backed regime change attempts during the Cold War (1947-1989)”): France 1947 Italy 1947 Albania 1949 Belarus 1949 Bulgaria 1949 Czechoslovakia 1949 East Germany 1949 Estonia 1949 Latvia 1949 Lithuania 1949 Poland 1949 Romania 1949 Hungary 1949 Russia 1949 Ukaraine 1949 North Korea 1950 Guatemala 1952 Iran 1952 Japan 1952 Indonesia 1954 Syria 1955 Lebanon 1957 Tibet 1958 Laoos 1959 Dominican Republic 1960 Congo 1960 Guyana 1961 Dominican Republic 1961 North Vietnam 1961 Cuba 1961 Chile 1962 Haiti 1963 Bolivia 1963 Angola 1964 Mozambique 1964 Somalia 1964 Brazil 1964 Dominican Republic 1965 Hati 1965 Thailand 1965 South Vietnam 1967 Bolivia 1971 Iraq 1971 Italy 1972 Portugal 1974 Angola 1975 Afghanistan 1979 South Yemen 1979 Grenada 1979 Nicaragua 1979 Nicaragua 1980 Chad 1981 Ethiopia 1981 Poland 1981 Cambodia 1982 Surinam 1982 Libya 1982 Liberia 1983 Chile 1964 Philippines 1984 Angola 1985 Haiti 1986 Panama 1987 — That list is incomplete. Eric Zuesse (blogs at https://theduran.com/author/eric-zuesse/)
For two examples: it omits Thailand 1948 when the CIA cut itsself in on the profits from the international opium trade, and Indonesia 1965 when President Johnson helped organize the extermination of at least 500,000 land-reform proponents there and helped to install General Suharto (who then embezzled $15-35 billion from the country). Including just those two additional cases, they total to 64 U.S. coups during those 42 years 1947-1989. Also not included are coups that the author felt were only supported by the U.S. Government but not planned by the U.S. Government, such as allegedly “the 1967 Greek coup or the 1976 Argentine coup.” The author recognized that there might have been coups she didn’t know about. Furthermore, she was explicit that her study was aimed at supporting “a theory regarding the security motives driving America’s Cold War interventions.” That is clearly a false theory (that America’s foreign coups were done in order to protect U.S. national security — which was virtually never the case). Two examples showing it to be false were the two I mentioned that she had excluded: the 1948 CIA Thai coup to install a regime that would cut the CIA in for off-the-books funding of the CIA from the drug underworld (kickbacks, basically protection-money aid to the CIA), and the 1965 Indonesian coup to benefit U.S. owners of rubber plantations there. Routinely, scholars are willing to start with false assumptions in order to suppport an unrealistically favorable view of their Govenment. It’s myth-preserving scholarship, not science; and it is common; it’s routine in the social ‘sciences’. A realistic presumption would be that ever since Truman became President in 1945 and started (in 1947, the year he started the CIA) America’s coups outside the Western hemisphere (O’Rourke also mentions that there had been U.S. coups in “Nicaragua (1909, 1910, and 1926), Honduras (1911, the Dominican Republic (1912, 1914, and 1916), Mexico (1914), Haitis (1915, and Costa Rica (1919)”), there have been around 80 of them since Truman came into office in 1945. During that same period, there have been at least 130 U.S. military invasions, plus countless illegal sanctions, in order to conquer countries it covets adding to its empire. After WW2, the vast majority of the world’s international aggressions — coups, invasions, subversions, and sanctions — have come from, or been initiated by, the U.S. Government. Rather than policing the world to maintain peace such as it claims, it has been the world’s biggest organized-criminal operation and source of wars, with no close second. Her book studiously ignores that the post-1944 U.S. Government has been mega-imperialistic and is driven by greed for evermore power and wealth by America’s billionaires, who benefit from these coups, wars, etc., which expand their mega-corporate empire. ————— Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.
|
User login |
assassination attempts?....
An incomplete list of attempted coups and assassinations
assassination attempts and successful assassinations, in which the
attempt against Trump is part of:
07.5.24 Assassination attempt on Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman (failed)
12.5.24 Failed attempt at a color revolution in Georgia,
14.5.24 Attempted coup in Turkey against Erdogan
15.5.24 Assassination attempt on Slovakian Prime Minister Fico
16.5.24 Arrest in Serbia for an assassination attempt on President Vučić
19.5.24 Assassination of Iranian President Raisi and his Foreign Minister,
20.5.24 Attempted coup in the Congo
25.5.24 Emergency landing of Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan’s helicopter not far from the Raisi crash site,
30.5.24 Putin’s residence in Altai burnt down,
31.5.24 Assassination attempt on M. Stürzenberger in Mannheim.
12.7.24 Assassination attempt on D. Ttump.
Most of the list concerns people who do not unconditionally obey
Western values. Three of those affected could be seen as friends of Israel friends of Israel:
Paschinian, Stürzenberger and Trump.
https://www.theinteldrop.org/2024/07/22/disclosure-data-on-co-attempts-at-risk/
READ FROM TOP..
the world dominators....
‘The rulers of the world’ by Moritz Nestor
People who “did not experience a surge of rage where it was due”, wrote the great Greek philosopher Aristotle in his ‘Nicomachean Ethics’ 2500 years ago, were living ‘wrongly’. The behaviour of someone untouched by injustice is, he said, “as if he had no feeling and as if it caused him no pain, and, as he experienced no anger, as if he were also incapable of defending himself, since after all, it betrays a sense of slavery to remain silent when being insulted, or to abandon loved ones.”
I can still remember that ‘surge of rage’ I felt when, at the age of 17, I questioned the firmly established world view of my German nationalist father for the first time in my life, at the Christmas of 1968, when in our churches there was once again preaching about ‘peace on earth and goodwill towards men’. At that time the words sounded stale to me and I was seized by a strong emotion, because the images of the Vietnam War were in my mind’s eye: the streams of bombers, the carpets of bombs and the terrible, glaring napalm fireballs by means of which ‘our American friends’ were slaughtering the Vietnamese population in the name of the same God I believed in. But I had never thought about these matters before. A year earlier, the Archbishop of New York, Cardinal Spellman, military vicar of the US armed forces, had praised the Vietnam GIs as ‘soldiers of Christ’ and incited them ‘to fight to total victory’.1
When I read Armin Wertz’s book ‘Die Weltbeherrscher’ (The rulers of the world), published by Westend Verlag in 2015, I was reminded of that Christmas in 1968. The book is highly recommended for anyone lacking a ‘surge of rage’. It is nothing less than the “first complete chronicle of all US operations in independent states” – from 1794 (18 years after the founding of the USA in 1776) to 2014. Armin Wertz used the Congressional Research Service Report RL 3017 of the Foreign Affairs Department of the US Congressional Research Service from 2004 as his basic source, and he completed the gaps with his own research.2
Born in Friedrichshafen in 1945, Armin Wertz studied economics in Berlin and worked for over thirty years as a foreign correspondent: for ‘Der Spiegel’ in Central America, for the ‘Frankfurter Rundschau’ and the ‘Tages-Anzeiger’ in Israel and for the ‘Freitag’ and the ‘Berliner Zeitung’ in Southeast Asia. He also published as a freelance journalist in ‘taz’, Zeit, ARD, ‘Tagesspiegel’, ‘Standard’ (Vienna), for mare, Lettre International, El Mundo (Medellin), TEMPO (Jakarta) and other media. He has published four books: ‘Tränen im Heiligen Land’(Tears in the Holy Land), ‘Die verdammte Presse’ (The damned press), ‘Sie sind viele, sie sind eins. Eine Einführung in die Geschichte Indonesiens’ (They are many, they are one. An Introduction to the History of Indonesia.) and ‘Der Sieg der freien Welt. Militärische und geheimdienstliche Operationen der USA im Ausland’ (The Victory of the Free World. US military and intelligence operations abroad). Armin Wertz also wrote for the internet newspaper ‘Journal21’, a project of the former head of ‘Tagesschau’, Heiner Hug, who
“with passion and financial commitment, has gathered around him a group of mostly veteran journalists who cannot stop writing and investigating, but who are increasingly finding no place in the media, which are saving themselves to death”.
On 320 of the 400 pages, Armin Wertz outlines the almost countless imperialist US aggressions between 1794 and today – wars, military interventions, murders on state orders, gross but also subtle US interference in the affairs of other sovereign states. The descriptions of the US drone murders between 2004 and 2011 alone fill fifteen densely printed pages, just a few lines per murderous activity!
The overall picture provided by Armin Wertz’s chronicle, the complete collection of all the misdeeds of this state that calls itself a democracy, is an absolute catastrophe: Only a very few of the 220 years of US history passed without wars, military interventions, without state murders and without overt or covert interference in the affairs of other sovereign states ... excepting in five of its countless wars of aggression the USA did not find it necessary to even declare war! Everything happened in the abused and desecrated name of democracy.
The 400 pages of the book are prefaced by a quote from George F. Kennan, who was head of the planning staff at the US State Department in 1948:
“We own 50 per cent of the world’s wealth, but we make up only 6.3 per cent of the world’s population. [...] Faced with such a situation, we cannot avoid attracting envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to find a form of relationship that will allow us to maintain these differences in prosperity without seriously compromising our national security. To achieve this, we will have to abandon all sentimentality and daydreaming; [...]. We must not delude ourselves that today we can afford the luxury of altruism and world happiness [...]. We should stop talking about vague and unrealistic goals such as human rights, raising living standards and democratisation. The day is not far off when our actions must be guided by sober power calculations. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.”
Kennan said these three years after America dropped the first two atomic bombs in world history, the most terrible of all weapons. He said it in 1948, the same year that the American First Lady Eleonore Roosevelt with great pomp proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and as head of the planning staff at the US State Department he spat on human rights and democracy. Mocked them as ‘vague’ and ‘unrealistic’ ‘sentimentalities and daydreams’. We have not forgotten who, just a few years before, mocked human rights as a humanitarian fantasy! As clever as a snake, the wolf slipped into the sheep’s clothing of human rights in 1948. As if the USA were the guardians of human rights!
What kind of state is this, whose command centre spits on human rights and calls them ‘sentimentalities’ and ‘daydreams’ while the president’s wife proclaims the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? But Kennan named what the US has always done: “renounce all sentimentality and daydreaming”, “stop talking about vague and unrealistic goals like human rights, raising living standards and democratisation”, “be guided by sober power calculation”.
Wertz documents the history of the USA’s bloody policy of aggression, conquest and power, which has had nothing to do with democracy from the outset: “The founding of the United States and its subsequent expansion across the North American continent”, Wertz writes,
“were only achieved with the destruction of numerous Indian nations. [...] In order to appropriate their land, the USA concluded 800 treaties with the various Indian nations. Around 430 of these were not ratified by Congress. Nevertheless, the Indians were expected to abide by the terms of these treaties. ‘Even more tragic, however, was that of the 370 treaties that were ratified, the United States did not honour a single one’, [...]. When the first Europeans arrived on the East Coast, between twenty and fifty million Indians lived in the land that is now the United States. By the end of the 19th century, there were just 250,000 left.”
The compressed descriptions of this genocide in the ‘World Rulers’ awakened in me again that ‘surge of rage’ mentioned by the great Aristotle and at the same time the memory of how as a boy, I loved reading Karl May, from whose moving foreword in the first volume of the Winnetou trilogy I just have to quote here:
“It was not only a hospitable reception, but an almost divine veneration which the first ‘pale faces’ were greeted with among the Indsmen. What reward did the latter receive for this? There is no doubt that the land they inhabited belonged to them; it was taken from them. Anyone who has read the history of the ‘famous’ conquistadores knows what rivers of blood flowed and what atrocities were committed. The same model was followed later on. The white man came with sweet words on his lips, but at the same time with a sharpened knife in his belt and a loaded gun in his hand. He promised love and peace and gave hate and blood. The red man had to give way, step by step, further and further back. From time to time, he was guaranteed ‘eternal’ rights to ‘his’ territory, but after a short time he was chased out of this again, further and further. The land was ‘bought’ from him, but he was either not paid at all or paid in worthless barter goods that he had no use for. But he was taught all the more carefully all about the insidiously poisonous ‘firewater’, and had to learn as well about the smallpox and other, even worse and more disgusting diseases, which thinned out entire tribes and depopulated whole villages. If the red man tried to assert his rights, he was answered with gunpowder and lead and had to give way to the superior weapons of the whites. Enraged by this, he took revenge on every single paleface he encountered, and always the consequences were formal massacres among the Reds. As a result, he, originally a proud, bold, brave, truth-loving, sincere huntsman who was always loyal to his friends, became a secretly sneaking, suspicious, lying man, for no fault of his own, because it was not he but the white man who was to blame. [...] Yes, he has become a sick man, a dying man, and we stand pityingly by his miserable bed to cover his eyes. To stand by a death bed is a serious thing, but it is a hundred times more serious when that dying bed is the bed of an entire race. Many, many questions arise, above all the following: What could this race have achieved if it had been given the time and space to develop its inner and outer powers and talents? What peculiar cultural forms will be lost to humanity through the demise of this nation?”
The founding fathers of the USA, such as Benjamin Franklin, did not yet consider the Indians to be inferior ‘savages’: “The League of the Iroquois inspired Benjamin Franklin to copy them when he planned the state federation [of the later USA]”, wrote John F. Kennedy in the foreword to Willam Brandom’s ‘American Heritage Book of Indians’. But the generations after the Enlightenment philosopher Franklin “again followed the ideas of the bigoted Pilgrim Fathers”, who considered themselves a ‘chosen people’ and the North American continent their ‘promised land’: “1. the earth and everything in it is God’s. 2. God may give the earth or any part of it to his chosen people. 3. we are his chosen people.”
Even the “most modest independence fighters around George Washington” yet wanted to advance conquests from the 13 East Coast states to the Mississippi. Thirty years later, Thomas Jefferson was already dreaming of the Rocky Mountains as the western frontier. Another forty years later, Congress was talking about conquering the entire continent “from the Isthmus of Darien (Panama) to the Behring Strait”. And in 1912, US President Taft remarked: “The whole hemisphere will be ours; in fact, because of our racial superiority, it already morally belongs to us.” He was referring to the American double continent from the North Pole to the South Pole as the promised land of the ‘racially superior’ Americans! In 1985, there were still over twenty Native American tribes living in the USA whose members did not have American citizenship. The USA’s military sphere of influence in the form of vassal states is expanding worldwide.
Those who did not want to be slaughtered or colonised or who insisted on their state sovereignty were dehumanised by the aggressive US imperialists as early as in the 19th century as ‘terrorists’, but more frequently as ‘savages’, ‘bandits’, ‘Islamic fanatics’ or ‘pirates’.
Some say that nothing is done by simply recognising the evil. So why does power have to eliminate dissenters?
To return to the beginning: 2500 years ago, Aristotle complained that we were living ‘wrongly’ if we did not experience a ‘surge of rage’ in the face of injustice. Since this reaction was a given in the face of injustice committed! And this remains true in view of the almost incomprehensible extent of injustice as it is summarised in the ‘Rulers of the world’! We would not use our reason, he said, unless we were shaken by strong feelings of astonishment or indignation. Reading ‘Rulers of the world’ is particularly suited to awakening this ‘surge of rage’, to being touched and feeling pain and anger and no longer behaving as if one were unable to defend oneself. This inner transformation is also an act. It makes you lose your ‘sense of slavery’ and clears the way for ‘outer action’, which you will now wade into out of your own free inner resolve. •
https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2024/nr-14-9-juli-2024/die-weltbeherrscher
READ FROM TOP....
stop the wars.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WXmNuqec1M
Col Douglas Macgregor on Netanyahu in DCREAD FROM TOP.
a CIA chechen....
Historic US-Russia prisoner swap exposes CIA support for Chechen jihad
BY KIT KLARENBERG
Western media focused intently on a Russian “murderer” released in the exchange with Washington, but whitewashed the record of his target – a Chechen militant now confirmed as a CIA asset.
August 1 saw the largest prisoner exchange between Moscow and Washington since the end of the Cold War. Among those freed were Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich and former US marine Paul Whelan, who were each serving 16 year sentences for espionage.
In the other direction, Russian opposition activists jailed for criticism of the so-called “special military operation” have now resettled in Western countries. This includes politician Ilya Yashin, sentenced to eight-and-a-half years in December 2022. At a press conference in Bonn, Germany on August 2, he described the feeling of being beside “the wonderful Rhine river”, when just a week earlier he was imprisoned in Siberia, as “really surreal.” But Yashin claimed that his release was difficult to personally accept, “because a murderer was free.”
He referred here to Vadim Krasikov, a Russian convicted of killing the Georgian-born Chechen militant Zelimkhan Khangoshvili in Berlin in August 2019, who was also released as part of the deal. He was reportedly of extremely high value to the Kremlin. In a February 2024 interview with US journalist Tucker Carlson, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposedtrading Gershkovich for an unnamed Russian “patriot” imprisoned in a “US-allied country” for “liquidating a bandit.”
Krasikov was that “patriot”, and Khangoshvili that “bandit.” In 2004, Khangoshvili led a lethal guerilla operation that killed four Russian soldiers. Krasikov was tasked by the Russian state with serving the Chechen justice, cutting him down in broad daylight in Berlin in 2019.
While the Russian operative has been subject of intense mainstream interest since the swap, the media has largely whitewashed Khangoshvili’s background. To the extent he was mentioned at all, he was laconically characterized as a “Chechen militant,” or more favorably, as a “dissident.” For some anti-Russian ideologues, the Western media’s failure to completely lionize Khangoshvili demanded a rebuke. Giorgi Kandelaki, formerly a Georgian lawmaker with the United National Movement of the now-imprisoned former President and US posterboy Mikheil Saakashvili, was so repulsed he took to ‘X’ to correct the record.
Kandelaki seethed that Khangoshvili was, in fact, a patriotic Georgian citizen and state “security agent.” What’s more, he was “part of US-Georgian security cooperation,” and “highly respected by the CIA.” The furious former MP suggested Khangoshvili “was assassinated in part because he loyally served” Tbilisi at a time when it was an effective US colony under the puppet Saakashvili’s rule.
By attempting to heroize Khangoshvili, Kandelaki highlighted an inconvenient truth, one which has been heavily concealed and consistently denied: the CIA covertly supported fundamentalist Chechen separatist militias while they fought consecutive guerrilla wars against Russian rule during the 1990s and early 2000s, carrying out atrocities against civilians and prisoners of war alike.
The Western media’s refusal to acknowledge Khangoshvili’s US intelligence connections reveals that a coverup of this sordid, clandestine history remains ongoing today.
Chechen agent worked for multiple Western spying agenciesA September 2019 Daily Beast report by neoconservative operative Michael Weiss provided details on Khangoshvili’s alliance with the CIA, and his Chechen war history. Describing him as “a battle-tested veteran” of those conflicts, he reportedly “commanded enormous respect” from ethnic Chechens residing in Georgia’s Pankisi Gorge. Khangoshvili was also “a close confidant” of Aslan Maskhadov, Chechnya’s separatist president, killed in a March 2005 FSB raid. He also enjoyed an extremely warm relationship with Western spying agencies.
According to Weiss, “American counterterrorism officials not only found Khangoshvili’s intelligence credible and useful,” but recruited new Chechen agents based on his assessments. These assets were subsequently “sent abroad by the CIA.” Simultaneously, he informed “on members of his native community” in Georgia. Oblique reference is also made to his “six-year stint as the valued asset of a European security service,” and how his residence in Berlin was “located right across the street from the headquarters of the BND,” Germany’s foreign intelligence agency.
Unmentioned in that report, Khangoshvili commanded a violent June 2004 takeover of the Ingusethian city of Nazran by Chechen militants. Dozens of Russian security officials were killed, including senior FSB officers. He was resultantly placed on a list of 19 wanted “terrorists” that Moscow shared with Western authorities, although recipient and host governments alike refused to turn any of them over, raising the Kremlin’s ire. German investigators allege Khangoshvili’s murder was intended to send a clear message to those who cross Russia hiding abroad.
Whether the attack was in any way coordinated with, or even funded and directed by the CIA, remains an open question. At this time, Khangoshvili’s native Pankisi Gorge has been confirmed by the BBC to have provided refuge to Chechen separatist fighters, serving as a key staging ground for attacks on, and means of getting fighters and supplies into, Russia.
In 2002, Moscow threatened to carry out cross-border strikes on the area as a result. Georgia responded by pledging to reestablish order in the area, and invited US military advisers to assist in the mission. But as journalist Mark Ames has reported, Washington’s actual objective was to train Tbilisi’s forces in “key imperial outsourcing duties” and complete the country’s transformation into “a flagship franchise of America Inc.” The benefit for Georgia was “Russia wouldn’t fuck with them.” This perceived invincibility surely encouraged Chechen militants, including CIA asset Khangoshvili, to continue their activities apace.
Khangoshvili’s status as a “close confidant” of Aslan Maskhadov is similarly striking, because the Chechen separatist leader determinedly sought CIA support for his anti-Russian jihad. His right hand man, the Chechen militant and separatist activist Ilyas Akhmadov, has revealed that before visiting Washington in early 2001 for “low-profile” meetings with US officials, Maskhadov suggested he approach “large organizations that have huge capacities,” such as the CIA, to “help the Chechen cause…much as it helped the Afghans against the Russian invasion in 1979.”
“[Mashkadov] believed that the CIA, which had sent aid to Bin Laden…still had influence over them. Believing this, he thought the CIA could persuade various Muslim organizations abroad to send financial help,” Akhmadov has written. “I remembered he once said to me, referring to the United States, ‘Why don’t they send me the money? I’ll prove to be a very reliable partner.’”
Terror trail begins in BosniaAkhmadov claims he never met with the CIA during his visit to Washington. He nonetheless secured asylum in the US in 2004, despite intense Department of Homeland Security opposition, due to his militant past. The following year, the National Endowment for Democracy – a US government regime change front – provided him a fellowship. Akhmadov’s federally-funded mission was “to focus international attention on the humanitarian tragedy in Chechnya.”
In the meantime, multiple “Muslim organizations abroad” had become the subjects of criminal investigations in the US for providing financial assistance and much else besides to Chechen militants – just as Maskhadov desired. For years prior to 9/11, the FBI closely monitored the activities of US-based Islamic charities and relief organizations which, under humanitarian cover, funneled fighters, weapons, and money to numerous “jihads” across the globe.
No action was taken against these entities, in part because they were assisting fundamentalist fighters in US-directed proxy wars in countries such as Afghanistan. After 9/11, however, authorities moved quickly to proscribe their activities, and indicted their founders and staff on serious terrorism charges. Among them was the Benevolence International Foundation (BIF). In October 2002, its Syrian-American director Enaam Arnaout was charged with “providing material support to Al Qaeda and other violent groups” in Bosnia, Chechnya, and elsewhere.
Arnaout’s indictment painted a lurid picture of an individual and organization intimately connected with Bin Laden, explicitly encouraging “martyrdom.” He was alleged to have personally facilitated transport of senior Al Qaeda personnel to theaters of combat, by disguising them as BIF staff, and faced 90 years in jail as a result. Yet, in February 2003 he entered a plea agreement with prosecutors whereby he pleaded guilty to a relatively minor, single count of defrauding BIF investors, by concealing from them that:
“A material portion of the donations received by BIF based on BIF’s misleading representations was being used to support fighters overseas.”
In return, Arnaout received a mere decade-long prison sentence. Given the hype and sensationalism that had attended his indictment, and the accusations of US officials, the media was stunned by his light treatment. A contemporary New York Sun editorial suggested authorities sought “to avoid a risky trial” that they may have lost, had the terrorism charges against the BIF chief remained.
However, the court’s ruling acknowledged Arnaout avowedly provided boots, tents, uniforms, x-ray machines, ambulances, walkie talkies and other resources specifically for use by extremist, Al Qaeda-linked fighters. This did not elicit terrorism charges though, as US officials purportedly “had not established that the Bosnian and Chechen recipients of BIF aid were engaged in a federal crime of terrorism.”
We are thus left to ponder whether Arnaout’s prosecution was deliberately sabotaged, in order to avoid disclosures that would’ve implicated the CIA in BIF’s activities, and therefore the Bosnian and Chechen wars. It has been confirmed that throughout the former conflict, Mujahideen fighters from the world over were flown into Sarajevo on CIA black flights, and received voluminous US weapons shipments, in breach of a UN embargo. Their presence was fundamental to the Bosniaks’ war effort.
Under the terms of the 1995 Dayton Agreement, which ended that proxy conflict, Mujahideen fighters were required to leave Bosnia. Immediately after it was signed, Croat forces fighting alongside British and American mercenaries in the country began assassinating the group’s leadership to send the Islamists scattering. Some fled to Albania along with their US-supplied weapons, where they joined the incipient Kosovo Liberation Army, another Western-backed entity tied to Al Qaeda, and comprised of religious extremists.
Others were intercepted with the assistance of the CIA, and deported to their countries of origin to stand trial for serious terror offenses. This was perceived as a gross betrayal by the Mujahideen’s senior overseas leadership, which included Osama Bin Laden. It triggered a chain of events that ultimately culminated in 9/11. Several purported hijackers were veterans of Bosnia and Chechnya. As The Grayzone has revealed, at least two hijackers had likely been recruited by the CIA by the time of the attacks.
In a perverse twist, while the expulsion of Mujahideen fighters from Bosnia may have enraged Bin Laden, a French counterterrorism report subsequently concluded this “exfiltration” was highly beneficial for Al Qaeda. Its fighters thereafter became “useful again in spreading Jihad across other lands.” Many headed directly to fight Russia. They reportedly “preferred to go to Chechnya, instead of heading for European states to seek political asylum,” fearing they could instead be deported home to face terror charges.
This makes it abundantly clear that Khangoshvili, the so-called “dissident,” was hardly alone among militants “highly respected by the CIA” who fought against Russia in the Chechen conflicts.
https://thegrayzone.com/2024/08/05/us-russia-prisoner-swap-cia-chechen-jihad/
READ FROM TOP
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.