aldeilis.net

Interesting site that seems to have many articles over the same theme a sthe one below:

‘False Flag’ terrorism

“A false flag operation means that you execute a strike against your own people and then assign blame to the enemy. The result is that you appear to be highly justified when you in turn attack your enemy.” (Willem Middelkoop)

I am currently reading a book by Chomsky, and it seems to me a central missing piece of his worldview is state organized false flag terrorism. This article is about that.

Sword Play

By Chris Floyd
Published: February 18, 2005

‘You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent
people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The
reason was quite simple: to force … the public to turn to the state
to ask for greater security.”

This was the essence of Operation Gladio, a decades-long covert
campaign of terrorism and deceit directed by the intelligence
services of the West — against their own populations. Hundreds of
innocent people were killed or maimed in terrorist attacks — on
train stations, supermarkets, cafes and offices — which were then
blamed on “leftist subversives” or other political opponents. The
purpose, as stated above in sworn testimony by Gladio agent Vincenzo
Vinciguerra, was to demonize designated enemies and frighten the
public into supporting ever-increasing powers for government leaders
– and their elitist cronies.

First revealed by Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti in 1991,
Gladio (from the Latin for “sword”) is still protected to this day by
its founding patrons, the CIA and MI6. Yet parliamentary
investigations in Italy, Switzerland and Belgium have shaken out a
few fragments of the truth over the years. These have been gathered
in a new book, “NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism
in Western Europe,” by Daniele Ganser, as Lila Rajiva reports on
CommonDreams.org.

Originally set up as a network of clandestine cells to be activated
behind the lines in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe,
Gladio quickly expanded into a tool for political repression and
manipulation, directed by NATO and Washington. Using right-wing
militias, underworld figures, government provocateurs and secret
military units, Gladio not only carried out widespread terrorism,
assassinations and electoral subversion in democratic states such as
Italy, France and West Germany, but also bolstered fascist tyrannies
in Spain and Portugal, abetted the military coup in Greece and aided
Turkey’s repression of the Kurds.

Among the “smoking guns” unearthed by Ganser is a Pentagon document,
Field Manual FM 30-31B, which details the methodology for launching
terrorist attacks in nations that “do not react with sufficient
effectiveness” against “communist subversion.” Ironically, the manual
states that the most dangerous moment comes when leftist groups
“renounce the use of force” and embrace the democratic process. It is
then that “U.S. army intelligence must have the means of launching
special operations which will convince Host Country Governments and
public opinion of the reality of the insurgent danger.” Naturally,
these peace-throttling “special operations must remain strictly
secret,” the document warns.

Indeed, it would not do for the families of the 85 people ripped
apart by the Aug. 2, 1980 bombing of the Bologna train station to
know that their loved ones had been murdered by “men inside Italian
state institutions and … men linked to the structures of United
States intelligence,” as the Italian Senate concluded after its
investigation in 2000.

The Bologna atrocity is an example of what Gladio’s masters called
“the strategy of tension” — fomenting fear to keep populations in
thrall to “strong leaders” who will protect the nation from the ever-
present terrorist threat. And as Rajiva notes, this strategy wasn’t
limited to Western Europe. It was applied, with gruesome
effectiveness, in Central America by the Reagan and Bush
administrations. During the 1980s, right-wing death squads, guerrilla
armies and state security forces — armed, trained and supplied by
the United States — murdered tens of thousands of people throughout
the region, often acting with particular savagery at those times when
peaceful solutions to the conflicts seemed about to take hold.

Last month, it was widely reported that the Pentagon is considering a
similar program in Iraq. What was not reported, however — except in
the Iraqi press — is that at least one pro-occupation death squad is
already in operation. Just days after the Pentagon plans were
revealed, a new militant group, “Saraya Iraqna,” began offering big
wads of American cash for insurgent scalps — up to $50,000, the
Iraqi paper Al Ittihad reports. “Our activity will not be selective,”
the group promised. In other words, anyone they consider an enemy of
the state will be fair game.
Strangely enough, just as it appears that the Pentagon is
establishing Gladio-style operations in Iraq, there has been a sudden
rash of terrorist attacks on outrageously provocative civilian
targets, such as hospitals and schools, the Guardian reports. Coming
just after national elections in which the majority faction supported
slates calling for a speedy end to the American occupation, the shift
toward high-profile civilian slaughter has underscored the “urgent
need” for U.S. forces to remain on the scene indefinitely, to provide
security against the ever-present terrorist threat. Meanwhile, the
Bushists continue constructing their long-sought permanent bases in
Iraq: citadels to protect the oil that incoming Iraqi officials are
promising to sell off to American corporations — and launching pads
for new forays in geopolitical domination.

Perhaps it’s just a coincidence. But the U.S. elite’s history of
directing and fomenting terrorist attacks against friendly
populations is so extensive — indeed, so ingrained and accepted –
that it calls into question the origin of every terrorist act that
roils the world. With each fresh atrocity, we’re forced to ask: Was
it the work of “genuine” terrorists or a “black op” by intelligence
agencies — or both?

While not infallible, the ancient Latin question is still the best
guide to penetrating the bloody murk of modern terrorism: Cui bono?
Who benefits? Whose powers and policies are enhanced by the attack?
For it is indisputable that the “strategy of tension” means power and
profit for those who claim to possess the key to “security.” And from
the halls of the Kremlin to the banks of the Potomac, this cynical
strategy is the ruling ideology of our times