THE WAR ON TERROR CHARADE

Why was the current Director of National Intelligence's criticism only a face-washing performance for her new employer in The White House?

 

By Dany Smith

We have seen what the appointment of former Lt. Col. Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence (DNI) meant and the details aired before her confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee when she questioned the Obama-Biden administration's secret policy of supporting terrorist groups like Al Qaeda, ISIS and all their branches with the aim of overthrowing the Syrian government of Bashar Al Assad.

Gabbard seemed to portray herself as the truth-teller and the calling card of an administration that will not do the same led by Donald Trump.

Although that seemed to shock the dinosaurs on the Committee and exposed the blatant political contradiction to public opinion, it was only a performance that only showed a tiny part of the truth about the Deep State's involvement in the so-called “war on terror”.

From a distance Obama was a great hoax, a disappointment to Americans and to his own voters but even more so, to the promises he made in Egypt to harmonize relations between the US and the Arab-Islamic world. It was not necessary for Gabbard to tell us that the CIA at the command of John Brennan and the Pentagon generals gave support to gangs like Al Qaeda, Al Nusra and others planted in Syria and to the magical emergence of “Daesh” (ISIS) in Iraq. You only had to stand on one of the main streets of Samarra and Tikrit in July 2014 to see these strange guys dressed in black parading around in all sorts of armored vehicles and U.S. weaponry that had been delivered by the Saudis.

Gabbard missed the inaugural and momentous chapter, the genesis of the creation of these “pseudo-Islamist” monsters and I don't think she missed it. Rather, she said only the part that suited her and nothing more and that does not mean that she has tried to save the memory of bastards like George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and all the neoconservatives who concocted this evil strategy, she has only performed a performance to impost a transparency to the incoming administration that in reality, there is nothing transparent about it.

Gabbard knows very well that going back to the beginning of all this garbage, he should talk about many ugly things, very ugly things that have sunk the USA in the deserved disrepute it has today within the international concert. And if not, how do you accommodate democracy and values such as freedom and human rights with aggressions against other countries, military interventions and occupations, secret CIA prisons, tortures, executions and disappearances of thousands of human beings?

The subject is far from being forgotten. We have seen how several of these elements moving in the shadows have also been present advising with their unpleasant knowledge the neo-Nazi regime of Mr. Volodymyr Zelensky who has been the best and the most daring collaborator of NATO's plans by pretending to raze the Ukrainians of Donbass for the simple fact of being Russian-speaking. In that plan, Washington and its European partners encouraged Kiev to violate the Minsk agreements while silently arming the AFU.

But going back to the genesis of Al Qaeda's “Islamist terrorism” and its alleged connections with secular Arab governments such as Saddam Hussein's Iraqi government, we saw how that argument, besides being false, was, in the eyes of the most experienced analysts, an impossible relationship to conceive and even, in some cases, stupid.

Gabbard served in the invasion of Iraq from 2004 to 2005 and it does not seem credible that her memory has been erased. Although she was in a medical unit, it is possible that she was covertly serving in intelligence and it is therefore not credible that she would not have been aware, even if it was a rumor, of the dirty work being done by the military intelligence guys in Abu-Graib or Bucca.

Just as she does not close her personal story at the time, much less her biased view of the spontaneous flowering of terrorism supported from Washington to overthrow Syria. She only talks about what we all already know. You either see it all, or you see nothing.

In reality, Gabbard doesn't get to the post of Director of National Intelligence because of her beauty or her apparent outburst of brutal sincerity to the system she serves. She is more astute than many of her detractors give her credit for, and this performance before the committee proves it.

If she had been really upset about this alliance of the US government with the enemies of the country and with the knowledge she must have about the dark and dirty underbelly of the intelligence community, she would have had to talk about George W. Bush himself and his sinister partner Dick Cheney, creators of the mega business of the “fight against terrorism”, as the minimum references to the whole hoax that meant orchestrating the invasions of the Middle East and Central Asia by means of falsifications and lies. 

Perhaps she was not even born or was just a child when the initial mastermind George H. Bush, in his years as head of the CIA, already knew what the “Al Qaeda” program was all about, the Saudi connections (which went beyond Osama Bin Laden and his family) and the Afghan mujahideen who were prepared by the Pakistani ISI under the Agency's direction. But it was ripe enough to know what senior intelligence officers and especially General David Petraeus were deploying in Iraq and that was nothing more than recruiting assassins and mercenaries trained in camps in Jordan, to form groups like “Al Qaeda-Iraq” under the leadership of a disposable puppet (an Agency asset) named Abu Muzab Al Zarqawi and who was conveniently eliminated to enhance Bush's bid for re-election.

Undoubtedly, the “war on terror”, besides being a dialectical inconsistency in its meaning, was a screen to cover the big business of the arms industry and whose benefits reach the political elite. Thus, without the Bushes, Cheney and the neocon war mongers, there would have been no Osama´s, Al Baghdadi, Petraeus or Zarqawi´s and without them, they would not have been able to invent such a sinister elaboration.

We should not sleep and all the more so with Trump's foreign policy. Gabbard may be planning a far worse farce than his predecessors and it will be too late when you realize it.