Foreign Occupation Leads to More Terror

Rep. Ron Paul
U.S. Presidential Candidate
September 13, 2011

Ten years ago shocking and horrific acts of terrorism were carried out on US soil, taking over 3,000 innocent American lives.  Without a doubt, this action demanded retaliation and retribution.  However, much has been done in the name of protecting the American people from terrorism that has reduced our prosperity and liberty and even made us less safe.  This is ironic and sad, considering that the oft-repeated line concerning the reasoning behind the attacks is that they hate us for who we are – a free, prosperous people – and that we must not under any circumstances allow the terrorists to win.

U.S. Presidential Candidate Ron Paul

Though it is hard for many to believe, honest studies show that the real motivation behind the September 11 attacks and the vast majority of other instances of suicide terrorism is not that our enemies are bothered by our way of life.  Neither is it our religion, or our wealth.  Rather, it is primarily occupation.  If you were to imagine for a moment how you would feel if another country forcibly occupied the United States, had military bases and armed soldiers present in our hometowns, you might begin to understand why foreign occupation upsets people so much.  Robert Pape has extensively researched this issue and goes in depth in his book “Cutting the Fuse:  The Explosion of Global Suicide Terrorism and How to Stop It”.  In fact, of 2,200 incidents of suicide attacks he has studied worldwide since 1980, 95% were in response to foreign occupation.

Pape notes that before our invasion of Iraq, only about 10% of suicide terrorism was aimed at Americans or American interests.  Since, then however, not only is suicide terrorism greatly on the rise, but 91% of it is now directed at us.

Yes, the attacks of 9/11 deserved a response.  But the manner in which we responded has allowed radicals in the Muslim world to advance a very threatening narrative about us and our motivation in occupying their lands.  Osama bin Laden referred to us as “crusaders” with a religious agenda to convert Muslims, westernize their culture and take control of their resources.  If we had targeted our response to only the thugs and criminals who attacked us, and refrained from invading countries that had nothing to do with it, this characterization would seem less plausible to the desperate and displaced.  Blaming Islam alone is grossly misleading.

Instead, we chose a course of action that led to the further loss of 8,000 American lives, left 40,000 wounded and has hundreds of thousands seeking help at the Veterans Administration.  We are three to four trillion dollars poorer.  Our military is spread dangerously thin around the globe, at the expense of protection here at home.  Not only that, but we have allowed our freedoms to be greatly threatened and undermined from within.  The Patriot Act, warrantless searches and wiretapping, abuse of habeus corpus, useless and humiliating searches at airports are just a few examples of how we’ve allowed the terrorists to “win” by making our country less free.

Suicide terrorism did not exist in Iraq before we got there.  Now it does.  There are no known instances of Iranians committing suicide terrorism.  If we invade and occupy Iran, expect that to change, too.

Sometimes it can be very uncomfortable to ask the right questions and face the truth.  When a slick politician comes along and gives a much more soothing, self-congratulating version of events, it is very tempting to simply believe what we would like to hear.  But listening to lies does not make us safer, even though it might make us feel better about ourselves.

The truth is that ending these misguided wars and occupations will make us safer, more prosperous and more free.

Associated Press: Americans to cause coming Terrorism

Just as the Department of Homeland Security, Barack Obama and the corporate media have propagandized for the past couple of months, Associated Press is now echoing the talking point that Americans are the next Terrorists that will attack their own land. No proof of this has been shown.

Associated Press
September 10, 2011

WASHINGTON (AP) — Al-Qaida may have sent American terrorists or men carrying U.S. travel documents to launch an attack on Washington or New York to coincide with memorials marking the 10th anniversary of 9/11, government officials say.

One U.S. official says al-Qaida dispatched three men, at least two of whom could be U.S. citizens, to detonate a car bomb in one of the cities. Should that mission prove impossible, the attackers have been told to simply cause as much destruction as they can.

Word that al-Qaida had ordered the mission reached U.S. officials midweek. A CIA informant who has proved reliable in the past approached intelligence officials overseas to say that the men had been ordered by newly minted al-Qaida leader Ayman al Zawahri to mark the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks Sunday by doing harm on U.S. soil.

The tipster says the would-be attackers are of Arab descent and may speak Arabic as well as English. Counterterrorism officials were looking for certain names associated with the threat, but it was unclear whether the names were real or fake.

Counterterrorism officials have been working around the clock to determine whether the threat is accurate, but so far, have been unable to corroborate it, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the investigation.

In the meantime, extra security was put in place to protect the people in the two cities that took the brunt of the jetliner attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon a decade ago. It was the worst terror assault in the nation’s history, and al-Qaida has long dreamed of striking again to mark the anniversary. But it could be weeks before the intelligence community can say whether this particular threat is real.

Undaunted by talk of a new terror threat, New Yorkers and Washingtonians wove among police armed with assault rifles and waited with varying degrees of patience at security checkpoints Friday.

Security worker Eric Martinez wore a pin depicting the twin towers on his lapel as he headed to work in lower Manhattan where he also worked 10 years ago when the towers came down. “If you’re going to be afraid, you’re just going to stay home,” he said.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg, too, made a point of taking the subway to City Hall.

Briefed on the threat Friday morning, President Barack Obama instructed his security team to take “all necessary precautions,” the White House said. Obama still planned to travel to New York on Sunday to mark the 10th anniversary with stops that day at the Pentagon and Shanksville, Pa.

Washington commuters were well aware of the terror talk.

Cheryl Francis, of Chantilly, Va., said she travels over the Roosevelt bridge into Washington every day and doesn’t plan to change her habits. Francis, who was in Washington on Sept. 11, 2001, said a decade later the country is more aware and alert.

“It’s almost like sleeping with one eye open,” she said, but she added that people need to continue living their lives.

The intelligence community regularly receives tips and information of this nature. But the timing of this particular threat had officials especially concerned, because it was the first “active plot” that came to light as the country marked the significant anniversary, a moment that was also significant to al-Qaida, according to information gleaned in May from Osama bin Laden’s compound.

The U.S. government has long known that terrorists see the 10th anniversary of 9/11 and other uniquely American dates as opportunities to strike. Officials have also been concerned that some may see this anniversary as an opportunity to avenge bin Laden’s death.

Britain, meanwhile, warned its citizens who are traveling to the U.S. that there was a potential for new terror attacks that could include “places frequented by expatriates and foreign travelers.”

Acutely aware of these factors, law enforcement around the country had already increased security measures at airports, nuclear plants, train stations and more in the weeks leading up to Sept. 11. The latest threat, potentially targeting New York or Washington, prompted an even greater security surge in those cities. U.S. embassies and consulates abroad had also boosted their vigilance in preparation for the anniversary.

At Penn Station in New York, transit authority police carried assault rifles and wore helmets and bullet proof vests as they watched crowds of commuters. Police searched passengers’ bags as they entered the subway, and National Guard troops in camouflage fatigues moved among riders, eyeing packages.

In Washington, Police Chief Cathy Lanier warned that unattended cars parked in suspicious locations or near critical buildings and structures would be towed.

Speaking in New York, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said there was “a specific, credible but unconfirmed report that al-Qaida, again, is seeking to harm Americans and in particular, to target New York and Washington.”

Brazil Protecting Colombian FARC Terrorist Since 2005

by Alex Newman
The New American
August 23, 2011

American and Colombian officials suspected that a decision by the Brazilian government granting political asylum to a prominent Marxist terrorist was made under pressure from former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, whose Workers’ Party (PT) has frequently been accused of receiving millions of dollars from the drug-trafficking terror group known as the FARC. The suspicions surrounding the case were highlighted in an explosive U.S. diplomatic cable from 2006 that was recently released by the whistle-blowing organization WikiLeaks. But despite the enormity of the revelations in the document, entitled “Brazil Grants Asylum to FARC Terrorist,” there has been virtually no press coverage of the scandal so far.

Even Establishment media outlets such as Veja Magazine has reported on the FARC - PT contacts.

The saga described in the cable began when Francisco Antonio Cadena, the so-called “Ambassador to Brazil” for the communist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), was arrested by Brazilian authorities in 2005. He was apparently living there with his family at the time.

Known as “Oliverio Medina” in Brazil, the high-ranking terrorist was taken into custody based on a request from Interpol pursuant to a Colombian warrant. He was wanted for a broad range of crimes including murder for terrorist purposes, extortion, kidnapping, and terrorism.

When Cadena was finally arrested, the FARC’s “International Commission” immediately sprang into action. It issued a statement the next day calling for the release of “Oliverio Medina, who is a member of our International Commission.”

According to the U.S. cable, citing a Colombian embassy official, Cadena also had many high-level friends within the Brazilian government. “[D]uring the many years Cadena spent in Brazil prior to his arrest last year, he had cultivated close ties with President Lula’s Labor Party (PT) and had met with leaders of the PT in a house just outside of Brasilia (called the Red Heart Mansion) owned by a PT member of Congress,” noted the cable, signed by the highest-ranking American official in Brasilia at the time, Chargé d’Affaires ad interim Philip Chicola.

The Colombian embassy official cited in the report also “echoed press and other public accounts that PT leaders had met with Cadena in prison,” according to the U.S. embassy document. “While pointing out that claims of FARC donations to PT campaigns had never been proven, he insisted there was ample proof of Cadena’s ties with PT leaders.”

The decision to grant political asylum to the internationally known terrorist was made in total secrecy by the Brazilian National Committee on Refugees in mid-2006. And by approving the request, according to the cable, the government of Brazil was actually violating its own rules — individuals involved in terrorism and drug trafficking are supposed to be extradited, not granted asylum.

“The decision by the Brazilian committee is audacious but not necessarily surprising, as is the near silence surrounding it,” the cable noted. “The granting of asylum to a known terrorist flies in the face of Brazilian claims to oppose international terrorism. Particularly troubling are the allegations of the Presidency subverting the judicial process and pressuring the refugee committee to take a decision contrary to its own guidelines, allegations we find credible.”

According to “unofficial” information provided to the Colombian embassy in Brazil, the decision to grant asylum was made after Cadena promised to sever ties with the FARC. But American and Colombian officials weren’t buying it.

“We, like the Colombians, will be trying to find out what the official rationale for the asylum decision was and how that can be reconciled with the [Government of Brazil]’s supposed opposition to international terrorism,” the cable noted, requesting instructions from Washington about how to proceed. “Embassy believes that high level political pressure resulted in this decision.”

The Brazilian government essentially refused to provide any information about what was going on, according to the cable. The refugee committee told the U.S. embassy that all documents and records related to the asylum decision were confidential. The Colombian government, meanwhile, was quietly informed about the denial of its extradition request — with no explanation — via the Brazilian embassy.

Read Full Article…

U.S. Regards its citizens as Terrorists

Government uses scare tactics to play people against each other and teach them how to tattle tale.

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
July 21, 2011

The artificial imminence of a terrorist attack against the United States continues to be the tool of choice for the U.S. government to provoke fear among its citizens. After the false-flag attacks of September 11, the government blamed Arabs and Muslims indiscriminately and told people to watch out and report any suspicious activity. The definition of suspicious or ‘out of the ordinary’ activity, however, was not specified. Neither was specified the reach of any potential attack, nor any credible information of an attempt to cause harm to the nation.

A decade later, the United States government has proven conspiracy theories correct. The whole security apparatus created before and after 9/11 was meant to be used on citizens, not elusive boogie men hiding in a cave or under a bed somewhere. The failure to carry out their policies of societal control through the menace of terrorism, obligated the government to change plans and, earlier rather than later, turn the homeland security machinery against the citizenry. Now, the threat of an attack perpetrated by a brown-skinned man somewhere in the 50 states has been downplayed to re-focus the attention towards the common middle-class, hard-working citizen.

Even though terrorists exist, the real measurable threat of an attack by Muslim or Arab terrorists is so miniscule that security experts such as Wayne Madsen, historians such as Webster Tarpley and former intelligence operatives such as Bob Chapman and Ray McGovern usually compare the likelihood of an attack with getting hit by lightning or dying during a bee attack. As it has been widely proven, the government not only cannot provide any hard evidence on an imminent attack on U.S. soil, but also has admitted to creating false threats to support the implementation of policies that violate well established constitutional rights such as privacy, the right to own and bear arms, assembly, protest in public places, and so on, using as an excuse the false premise that any ‘out of the ordinary’ citizen activity implies the potential threat of a terrorist attack.

Recently, townships in Phoenix and Arkansas have banned citizen gatherings without a municipal permit and tried to harass the mayor and other citizens who were in the process of revealing the out of control federal power grab occurring all over the country. Bureaucrats in those states and all over the nation have the backing of local police chiefs who either let the feds take over their towns in exchange for a larger federal budget for their police force, or side with the violators as a consequence of their ignorance.

While in previous opportunities the Department of Homeland Security has flashed its military-like capabilities to detain and apprehend citizens deemed as suspects -without any kind of legal basis- now, the government is trying to ‘alert’ the population about the threat that members of the middle-class, war veterans and minority citizens present to society. In a recent video issued by the U.S. government, the so-called ‘authorities’ profile every single type of person, but emphasize that the threat may come from white middle-class Americans. The first actor in the video psy-op sponsored by FEMA and Homeland Security, portrays a supposed caucasian terrorist who sprays can paint on a security camera to hide the arrival of a van carrying who knows what. In the sequence, an African-American man calls police to denounce what he calls ‘suspicious activity’. The video follows with pictures from previous terrorist attacks which ironically were carried out by the very same government such as the Oklahoma City bombing. This version of the facts often labeled as a conspiracy theory is supported by people like Major Edward A. Dames, an Army veteran of the United States. Dames said that there is a power group which intends to run another terrorist attack in Oklahoma City, similar to the attack of the 90’s. The Major has identified the location of the possible attack as 210 Park Avenue, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Read the testimony of ex-military here.

In other sections of the video, people can see a caucasian man dropping a backpack with what appears to be an explosive device, while another man observes through an office window. For anyone who is not familiar with psychological operations, this is the way terrorist tell you what their next move will be. In other words, it is very likely the next terrorist attack on United States soil will be a truck bomb inside a federal building, an explosive device on some city corner or any of the other forms shown in the video. The exposure of the public to these kind of scenarios guarantees that the masses will believe the government when it comes out to say that the latest terrorist attack was carried out by white man who left car bombs or explosive devices somewhere to kill police, federal workers or their neighbors who lived or worked around the corner.

The most recent video created by Homeland Security is part of a campaign labeled as “See something, say something”, which has a budget of at least $10 million. Although the denouncement of possible terror attacks is painted as ‘patriotic’ and government officials often wrap themselves with the flag, history shows that urgent calls from governments to pass legislation to spy on its citizens or for citizens to spy on themselves result in the installation of what many call a Police State. History points us to specific examples. Requests to abolish civil and constitutional rights were followed by dictatorial regimes in communist Russia, Nazi Germany, communist China, Chile in the 70’s and 80’s, Brazil, Cuba up until today, and so on.

What is more alarming on this day and age is not that governments such as the American attempt to portray and blame its own citizens as terrorists; this is a historical fact. The novelty on calls from governments to ‘help avoid imminent attack’ is that in their propaganda, government officials label almost any form or dissent or traditions as Terrorism. That is why people who speak about the Constitution or constitutional rights are now suspects of terrorism. People who support non-establishment political candidates are identified as potential terrorists. People who display stickers or banners calling for the reduction in the size of government are stopped, searched and sometimes issued tickets for expressing their political or even religious beliefs.The list also includes Ron Paul supporters, gun owners, gold bullion enthusiasts, and anyone and everyone who opposes government policies.

Read the details of this policy in the Report entitled: MIAC Report: The Modern Militia Movement. Additionally, the government has hired pastors and priests to teach his followers to submit to government guidelines. This plan was implemented with Executive Order 13397: The Churches as Government Agencies.

FBI targeting political activists as terrorists

RT
May 25, 2011

Anti-terrorism resources are being used to target environmentalists, peace, animal and political activists who hold different views than the government.

It was recently revealed that a counter-terrorism firm spied on individuals who attended film screenings of the documentary Gasland. The film focuses on the practice of natural gas fracking and what impact it has on the environment and in the communities where it is used.

The FBI and other government agencies are cracking down on those who are not willing to say in line with the status quo.

In Pennsylvania, activists have faced terrorism charges for writing slogans in chalk on sidewalks. In California, 27 individuals are set to go on trial stemming for protest actions Elsewhere 23 anti-war, pro-labor and international solidarity activists may face a grand jury on trumped up charged. The FBI boasts 164,000 suspicious activity reports that are made up of activists who do not follow the governments view on matters.

The US government is using taxpayer money to squash the competition as opposed to protecting the American people from true terrorist threats, all while stomping on freedom of speech rights.

Carlos Montes, a co-founder of the Brown Berets Chicano Movement explained there is a marked rise of the US government using tools at their disposal designed to fight terrorism to impose oppression on political activists.

The protest movements are directly exposing and challenging the lines that the US government puts out,” he said, yet law enforcement authorities continue to crack down without just cause. “It’s a war against dissent.”

The government is working to stop the movement which is merely seeking to exercise its right to free speech and the right to protest

They’re trying to stop us but we’re not going to let them do it,” Montes added.

Watch the video report here.