Chossudovsky: Fabricating an Enemy


Richard Moore

Envelope-to: •••@••.•••
Delivered-To: •••@••.•••
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 00:24:46 -0600
From: Jeff Moebus <•••@••.•••>
Reply-To: •••@••.•••
X-Accept-Language: en
Subject: Fabricating an Enemy (DC, not Baghdad, Supports al-Qaeda) by Michel 
 Chossudovsky (pb1)

  Centre for Research on Globalisation Centre de
  recherche sur la mondialisation

It is the Bush Administration, rather than Baghdad,
which is supporting Al Qaeda

Fabricating an Enemy

by Michel Chossudovsky,    28  January / janvier 2003

The URL of this article is:

Part II of a two part Series. Part I was entitled: 
    War Propaganda

One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to
´fabricate an enemyª . As anti-war sentiment grows and
the political legitimacy the Bush Administration
falters, doubts regarding the existence of this
"outside enemy" must be dispelled.

As the date of the planned invasion of Iraq approaches,
the Bush Administration and its indefectible British
ally have multiplied the "warnings" of future Al Qaeda
terrorist attacks. The enemy has to appear genuine:
thousands of news stories and editorials linking Al
Qaeda to the Baghdad government are planted in the news
chain. Colin Powell underscored this relationship in
his presentation to the Davos World Economic Forum in
January. Iraq is casually presented in official
statements and in the media as "a haven for and
supplier of the terror network":

"Evidence that is still tightly held is accumulating
within the administration that it is not a matter of
chance that terror groups in the al Qaeda universe have
made their weapons of choice the poisons, gases and
chemical devices that are signature arms of the Iraqi

In this context, propaganda purports to drown the
truth, and kill the evidence on how Osama bin Ladenís
Al Qaeda was fabricated and transformed into "Enemy
Number One".

Meanwhile, "anti-terrorist operations" directed against
Muslims, including arbitrary mass arrests have been
stepped up. In the US, emergency measures are
contemplated in the case of war. The corporate media is
busy preparing public opinion. A ´national
emergencyª is said to be justified because ´America is
under attackª:

´ the U.S. and Western interests in the Western world
have to be prepared for retaliatory attacks from
sleeper cells the second we launch an attack in Iraq.ª

Defence of the Homeland

Emergency procedures are already in place. The
Secretary of Homeland Defence -whose mandate is to
´safeguard the nation from terrorist attacksª-- has
already been granted the authority ´ to take control of
a national emergencyª, implying the establishment of de
facto military rule. In turn, the Northern Command
would be put in charge of military operations in the US
´war on terrorism ª theatre.

The Smallpox Vaccination Program

In the context of these emergency measures,
preparations for compulsory smallpox vaccination are
already under way in response to a presumed threat of a
biological weapons attack on US soil. The vaccination
program ñwhich has been the object of intense media
propaganda-- would be launched with the sole purpose of
creating an atmosphere of panic among the population:

´A few infected individuals with a stack of plane
tickets--or bus tickets, for that matter--could spread
smallpox infection across the country, touching off a
plague of large proportions Ö. It is not inconceivable
that a North Korea or an Iraq could retain smallpox in
a hidden lab and pass the deadly agent on to

The hidden agenda is crystal clear. How best to
discredit the anti-war movement and maintain the
legitimacy of the State? Create conditions, which
instill fear and hatred, present the rulers as
"guardians of the peace", committed to weeding out
terrorism and preserving democracy. In the words of
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, echoing almost
verbatim the US propaganda dispatches:

"íI believe it is inevitable that they will try in some
form or other,Ö ëI think we can see evidence from the
recent arrests that the terrorist network is here as it
is around the rest of Europe, around the rest of the
worldÖ The most frightening thing about these people is
the possible coming together of fanaticism and the
technology capable of delivering mass destruction.í"4

Mass Arrests

The mass arrests of individuals of Middle Eastern
origin since September 11 2001 on trumped up charges is
not motivated by security considerations. Their main
function is to provide "credibility" to the fear and
propaganda campaign. Each arrest, amply publicised by
the corporate media, repeated day after day "gives a
face" to this invisible enemy. It also serves to drown
the fact that Al Qaeda is a creature of the CIA. "Enemy
Number One" is not an enemy but an instrument.)

In other words, the Propaganda campaign performs two
important functions.

First it must ensure that the enemy is considered a
real threat.

Second, it must distort the truth, --i.e. it must
conceal "the relationship" between this "fabricated
enemy" and its creators within the
military-intelligence apparatus.

In other words, the nature and history of Osama bin
Ladenís Al Qaeda and the Islamic brigades since the
Soviet-Afghan war must be suppressed because if it
trickles down to the broader public, the legitimacy of
the so-called "war on terrorism" collapses like a deck
of cards. And in the process, the legitimacy of the
main political and military actors is threatened.

The "9/11 Foreknowledge" Scandal

On 16 May 2002, the New York tabloids revealed that
"President Bush had been warned of possible high
jacking before the terror attacks" and had failed to

The disinformation campaign was visibly stalling in the
face of mounting evidence of CIA-Osama links. For the
first time since 9/11, the mainstream press had hinted
to the possibility of a cover-up at the highest
echelons of the US State apparatus.

FBI Agent Coleen Rowley, who blew the whistle on the
FBI, played a key role in unleashing the crisis. Her
controversial Memo to FBI Director Robert Mueller
pointed to the existence of "deliberate roadblocks" on
the investigation of the September 11 attacks:

"Minutes after the 9/11 attacks the SSA [David Frasca,
Director of the Radical Fundamentalist unit in the FBI]
said ëthis was probably all just a coincidenceí and we
were to do nothing until we got their permission,
because we might screw up something else going on
elsewhere in the country" 6

In response to an impending political crisis, the fear
and disinformation campaign went into overdrive. The
news chain was all of a sudden inundated with reports
and warnings of "future terrorist attacks". A carefully
worded statement (visibly intended to instill fear) by
Vice President Dick Cheney contributed to setting the

"I think that the prospects of a future attack on the
U.S. are almost a certainty... It could happen
tomorrow, it could happen next week, it could happen
next year, but they will keep trying. And we have to be

What Cheney is really telling us is that our
"intelligence asset", which we created, is going to
strike again. Now, if this "CIA creature" were planning
new terrorist attacks, you would expect that the CIA
would be first to know about it. In all likelihood, the
CIA also controls the so-called ëwarnings' emanating
from CIA sources on "future terrorist attacks" in the
US and around the World.

Propagandaís Consistent Pattern

Upon careful examination of news reports on actual,
"possible" or "future" terrorist attacks, the
propaganda campaign exhibits a consistent pattern.
Similar concepts appear simultaneously in hundreds of
media reports:

    they refer to "reliable sources", a growing body of
    evidence --e.g. government or intelligence or FBI.
    They invariably indicate that the terrorist groups
    involved have "ties to bin Laden" or Al Qaeda, or are
    "sympathetic to bin Laden",
    The reports often points to the possibility of
    terrorist attacks, "sooner or later" or "in the next
    two months".
    The reports often raise the issue of so-called "soft
    targets", pointing to the likelihood of civilian
    They indicate that future terrorist attacks could take
    place in a number of allied countries (including
    Britain, France, Germany) in which public opinion is
    strongly opposed to the US-led war on terrorism.
    They confirm the need by the US and its allies to
    initiate "pre-emptive" actions directed against these
    various terrorist organizations and/or the foreign
    governments which harbour the terrorists.
    They often point to the likelihood that these terrorist
    groups possess WMD including biological and chemical
    weapons (as well as nuclear weapons). The links to Iraq
    and "rogue states" (discussed in Part I) is also
    mentioned. The warnings also include warnings regarding
    "attacks on US soil", attacks against civilians in
    Western cities.
    They point to efforts undertaken by the police
    authorities to apprehend the alleged terrorists.
    The arrested individuals are in virtually all cases
    Muslims and/or of Middle Eastern origin.
    The reports are also used to justify the Homeland
    Security legislation as well as the "ethnic profiling"
    and mass arrests of presumed terrorists.

This pattern of disinformation in the Western media
applies the usual catch phrases and buzz words. (See
press excerpts below. The relevant catch phrases are
indicated in italics):

"Published reports, along with new information obtained
from U.S. intelligence and military sources, point to a
growing body of evidence that terrorists associated
with and/or sympathetic to Osama bin Laden are planning
a significant attack on U.S. soil.

Also targeted are allied countries that have joined the
worldwide hunt for the radical Muslim cells hell-bent
on unleashing new waves of terrorist strikes. Ö The
U.S. government's activation of antiterrorist forces
comes as the FBI issued a warning Nov. 14 that a
"spectacular" new terrorist attack may be forthcoming -
sooner rather than later. ...

Elsewhere, the Australian government issued an
unprecedented warning to its citizens that al-Qaeda
terrorists there might launch attacks within the next
two months. 8

Although CIA Director George Tenet said in recent
congressional testimony that "an attempt to conduct
another attack on U.S. soil is certain," a trio of
former senior CIA officials doubted the chance of any
"spectacular" terror attacks on U.S. soil.9

"Germans have been skittish since the terrorist attacks
in the United States, fearing that their country is a
ripe target for terrorism. Several of the hijackers in
the Sept. 11 attacks plotted their moves in Hamburg.10

"On Dec. 18, a senior government official, speaking on
condition of anonymity, briefed journalists about the
ëhigh probabilityí of a terrorist attack happening
ësooner or later.í Ö he named hotels and shopping
centres as potential ësoft targetsíÖ The official also
specifically mentioned: a possible chemical attack in
the London subway, the unleashing of smallpox, the
poisoning of the water supply and strikes against
"postcard targets" such as Big Ben and Canary Warf.

The "sooner or later" alert followed a Home Office
warning at the end of November that said Islamic
radicals might use dirty bombs or poison gas to inflict
huge casualties on British cities. This also made big
headlines but the warning was quickly retracted in fear
that it would cause public panic. 11

The message yesterday was that these terrorists,
however obscure, are trying - and, sooner or later, may
break through London's defences. It is a city where
tens of thousands of souls,Ö Experts have repeatedly
said that the UK, with its bullish support for the US
and its war on terror, is a genuine and realistic
target for terror groups, including the al- Qaeda
network led by 11 September mastermind Osama bin

Quoting Margaret Thatcher: "Only America has the reach
and means to deal with Osama bin Laden or Saddam
Hussein or the other wicked psychopaths who will sooner
or later step into their shoes."13

According to a recent US State Department alert:
"Increased security at official US facilities has led
terrorists to seek softer targets such as residential
areas, clubs, restaurants, places of worship, hotels,
schools, outdoor recreation events, resorts, beaches
and planes."14

Actual Terrorist Attacks

To be "effective" the fear and disinformation campaign
cannot solely rely on unsubstantiated "warnings" of
future attacks, it also requires "real" terrorist
occurrences or "incidents", which provide credibility
to the Administrationís war plans. Propaganda endorses
the need to implement "emergency measures" as well as
implement retaliatory military actions.

The triggering of "war pretext incidents" is part of
the Pentagonís assumptions. In fact it is an integral
part of US military history.15 In fact in 1962, the
Joint Chiefs of Staff had envisaged a secret plan
entitled "Operation Northwoods, to deliberately trigger
civilian casualties to justify the invasion of Cuba:

    "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and
    blame Cuba," "We could develop a Communist Cuban terror
    campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and
    even in Washington" "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers
    would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."
    (See the declassified Top Secret 1962 document titled
    "Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in
    Cuba"16 (See Operation Northwoods at

There is no evidence that the Pentagon or the CIA
played a direct role in recent terrorist attacks. The
latter were undertaken by organisations (or cells of
these organisations), which operate quite
independently, with a certain degree of autonomy. This
independence is in the very nature of a covert
intelligence operation. The ´intelligence assetª is not
in direct contact with its covert sponsors. It is not
necessarily cognizant of the role it plays on behalf of
its intelligence sponsors.

The fundamental question is who is behind them? Through
what sources are they being financed? What is the
underlying network of ties?

A recent (2002) classified outbrief drafted to guide
the Pentagon ´calls for the creation of a so-called
´ Proactive, Pre-emptive Operations Group ª (P2OG), to
launch secret operations aimed at "stimulating
reactions" among terrorists and states possessing
weapons of mass destruction -- that is, for instance,
prodding terrorist cells into action and exposing
themselves to "quick-response" attacks by U.S. forces.ª

The P2OG initiative is nothing new. It essentially
extends an existing apparatus of covert operations.
Amply documented, the CIA has supported terrorist
groups since the Cold War era. This ´ prodding of
terrorist cells ª under covert intelligence operations
often requires the infiltration and training of the
radical groups linked to Al Qaeda.

Covert support by the US military and intelligence
apparatus has been channelled to various Islamic
terrorist organisations through a complex network of
intermediaries and intelligence proxies. Moreover,
numerous official statements, intelligence reports
confirm recent links (in the post Cold War era) between
US military-intelligence units and Al Qaeda operatives,
as occurred in Bosnia (mid 1990s), Kosovo (1998-99) and
Macedonia (2001).18 The Republican Party Committee of
the US Congress in a 1997 report points to open
collaboration between the US military and Al Qaeda
operatives in the civil war in Bosnia.19 (See US
Congress, 16 January 1997,

Ties to Al Qaeda and Pakistanís Military Intelligence (ISI)

It is indeed revealing that in virtually all post 9/11
terrorist occurrences, the terrorist organization is
said to have "ties to Osama bin Ladenís Al Qaeda". This
in itself is a crucial piece of information. Of course,
the fact that Al Qaeda is a creature of the CIA is
neither mentioned in the press reports nor is
considered relevant.

The ties of these terrorist organizations (particularly
those in Asia) to Pakistanís military intelligence
(ISI) is acknowledged in a few cases by official
sources and press dispatches. Confirmed by the Council
on Foreign Relations (CFR), some of these groups are
said to have links to Pakistanís ISI, without
identifying the nature of these links. Needless to say,
this information is crucial in identifying the sponsors
of these terrorist attacks. In other words, the ISI is
said to support these terrorist organizations, while at
same time maintaining close ties to the CIA.

The Bali Bomb Attack (October 2002)

The Bali attack in the Kuta seaside resort resulted in
close to 200 deaths, mainly Australian tourists. The
bomb attack was allegedly perpetrated by Jemaah
Islamiah, a group, which operates in several countries
in South East Asia. Press reports and official
statements point to close ties between Jemaah Islamiah
(JI) and Al Qaeda. The JIís "operational leader" is
Riduan Isamuddin, alias Hambali, a veteran of the
Soviet-Afghan war, who was trained in Afghanistan and
Pakistan. According to a report by UPI:

"The [Soviet-Afghan] war provided opportunities for key
figures of these groups, who went to Afghanistan, to
experience firsthand the glory of jihad. Many of the
radicals detained in Singapore and Malaysia derived
their ideological inspiration from the activities of
the Mujahideen in Afghanistan and Pakistan" 20

What the report fails to mention is that the training
of the Mujahideen in Afghanistan and Pakistan was a CIA
sponsored initiative launched under President Jimmy
Carter in 1979, using Pakistanís ISI as a go-between.

JIís links to Indonesiaís Military Intelligence

There are indications, that in addition to its alleged
links to Al Qaeda, Jemaah Islamiah also has links to
Indonesiaís military intelligence, which in turn has
links to the CIA and Australian intelligence.

The links between JI and Indonesiaís Intelligence
Agency (BIN) are acknowledged by the International
Crisis Group (ICG):

"This link [of JI to the BIN] needs to be explored more
fully: it does not necessarily mean that military
intelligence was working with JI, but it does raise a
question about the extent to which it knew or could
have found out more about JI than it has acknowledged."
21 (International Crisis Group,
, 2003)

The ICG, however, fails to mention that Indonesiaís
intelligence apparatus has for more than 30 years been
controlled by the CIA.

In the wake of the October 2002 Bali bombing, a
contradictory report emanating from Indonesiaís top
brass, pointed to the involvement of both the head of
Indonesian intelligence General A. M. Hendropriyono as
well as the CIA:

"The agency and its director, Gen. A. M. Hendropriyono,
are well regarded by the United States and other
governments. But there are still senior intelligence
officers here who believe that the C.I.A. was behind
the bombing."22

In response to these statements, the Bush
Administration demanded that President Megawati
Sukarnoputri, publicly refute the involvement of the
U.S in the attacks. No official retraction was issued.
Not only did President. Megawati remained silent on
this matter, she also accused the US of being:

"a superpower that forced the rest of the world to go
along with itÖ We see how ambition to conquer other
nations has led to a situation where there is no more
peace unless the whole world is complying with the will
of the one with the power and strength." 23

Meanwhile, the Bush Administration, had used the Bali
attacks to prop up its fear campaign:

"President Bush said Monday that he assumes al-Qaeda
was responsible for the deadly bombing in Indonesia and
that he is worried about fresh attacks on the United
States." 24

The news [regarding the Bali attack] came as US
intelligence officials warned that more attacks like
the Indonesian bombing can be expected in the next few
months, in Europe, the Far East or the US."25


The links of JI to the Indonesian intelligence agency
were never raised in the official Indonesian government
investigation --which was guided behind the scenes by
Australian intelligence and the CIA.

Moreover, shortly after the bombing, Australian Prime
Minister John Howard "admitted that Australian
authorities were warned about possible attacks in Bali
but chose not to issue a warning."26 Also In the wake
of the bombings, the Australian government chose to
work with Indonesiaís Special Forces the Kopassus, in
the so-called "war on terrorism".

Australia: "Useful Wave of Indignation"

Reminiscent of Operation Northwoods, the Bali attack
served to trigger "a useful wave of indignation."27
They contributed to swaying Australian public opinion
in favour of the US invasion of Iraq, while weakening
the anti-war protest movement. In the wake of the Bali
attack, the Australian government "officially" joined
the US-led "war on terrorism." It has not only used the
Bali bombings as a pretext to fully integrate the US-UK
military axis, it has also adopted drastic police
measures including "ethnic profiling" directed against
its own citizens:

Prime Minister John Howard made the extraordinary
declaration recently that he is prepared to make
pre-emptive military strikes against terrorists in
neighbouring Asian countries planning to attack
Australia. Australian intelligence agencies also are
very worried about the likelihood of an al-Qaeda attack
using nuclear weapons.28

The Attacks on the Indian Parliament (December 2001)

The December 2001 terrorist attacks on the Indian
Parliament --which contributed to pushing India and
Pakistan to the brink of war-- were allegedly conducted
by two Pakistan-based rebel groups, Lashkar-e-Taiba
("Army of the Pure") and Jaish-e-Muhammad ("Army of
Mohammed"). The press reports acknowledged the ties of
both groups to Al Qaeda, without however mentioning
that they were directly supported by Pakistan=s ISI.
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) confirms in this
regard that:

  "through its Interservices Intelligence agency (ISI),
  Pakistan has provided funding, arms, training
  facilities, and aid in crossing borders to Lashkar and
  JaishÖMany were given ideological training in the same
  madrasas, or Muslim seminaries, that taught the Taliban
  and foreign fighters in Afghanistan. They received
  military training at camps in Afghanistan or in
  villages in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir. Extremist
  groups [supported by the ISI] have recently opened
  several new madrasas in Azad Kashmir."29 (Council on
  Foreign Relations at ,
  Washington 2002)

What the CFR fails to mention is the crucial
relationship between the ISI and the CIA and the fact
that the ISI continues to support Lashkar, Jaish and
the militant Jammu and Kashmir Hizbul Mujahideen
(JKHM), while also collaborating with the CIA.
Ironically, confirmed by the writings of Zbigniew
Brzezinski (who happens to be a member of the CFR), the
training of these "foreign fighters" was an initiative
of US foreign policy, launched during the Carter
Administration in 1979 at the outset of the
Soviet-Afghan war. Coinciding with the 1989 Geneva
Peace Agreement and the Soviet withdrawal from
Afghanistan, the ISI was instrumental in the creation
of the militant Jammu and Kashmir Hizbul Mujahideen
(JKHM).30 The timely attack on the Indian Parliament,
followed by the ethnic riots in Gujarat in early 2002,
were the culmination of a process initiated in the
1980s, financed by drug money and abetted by Pakistanís
military intelligence.

Dismantling the Propaganda Campaign, Building an
Anti-War Consensus

We are at the juncture of the most serious crisis in
modern history, requiring an unprecedented degree of
solidarity, courage and commitment. America's war,
which includes the "first strike" use of nuclear
weapons, threatens the future of humanity.

Much of the justification for waging this war without
borders rests on the legitimacy of the Bush
administrationís anti-terrorist programme. The latter
forms part of the propaganda campaign, which in turn is
used to sway the US population into an unconditional
acceptance of the war agenda.

In the US, and around the world, the anti-war movement
has gained in impetus. While millions of people have
joined hands in opposing the war, the Bush
Administration's fear and disinformation campaign,
relayed by the corporate media, has served to uphold
the shaky legitimacy of the Bush administration.

At this critical crossroads, the anti-war/pro-democracy
movement must necessarily move to a higher plane, which
addresses the main functions of the Administration's
propaganda machine. The main purpose of propaganda is
to sustain the legitimacy of the rulers and ensure that
the rulers remain in power.

Undermining the Bush Administration's ´ Right to Ruleª

In other words, the mobilization of antiwar sentiment
in itself will not reverse the tide of war.

What is needed is to consistently challenge the
legitimacy of the main political and military actors,
reveal the true face of the American Empire and the
underlying criminalisation of foreign policy.
Ultimately what is required is to question and
eventually undermine the Bush Administration's ´right
to ruleª.

Revealing the lies behind the Bush Administration is
the basis for destroying the legitimacy of the main
political and military actors.

Even if a majority of the population is against the
war, this in itself will not prevent the war from
occurring. The propaganda campaignís objective is to
sustain the lies which support the legitimacy of the
main political and military actors, including Bush,
Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Tenet, Armitage, Rice, et
al. As long as the Bush Cabinet is considered a
´legitimate governmentª in the eyes of the people and
World public opinion, it will carry out the Iraqi
invasion plan, whether it has public support or not.

In other words, this legitimacy must be challenged.
Similarly in Britain, where a majority of the
population is against the US-led war, actions must be
launched which ultimately result in the downfall of the
Blair Cabinet and the withdrawal of Britain from the
US-led military coalition.

A necessary condition for bringing down the rulers is
to weaken and eventually dismantle their propaganda
campaign. How best to achieve this objective? By fully
uncovering the lies behind the ´ war on terrorismª and
revealing the complicity of the Bush administration in
the events of 9/11.

This is a big hoax, itís the biggest lie in US history.
The war pretext does not stick and the rulers should be

Moreover, it is important to show that ´ Enemy Number
One ª is fabricated. The terrorist attacks are indeed
real, but who is behind them? The covert operations in
support of terrorist organisations, including the
history of Al Qaedaís links to the CIA since the Soviet
Afghan war, must be fully revealed because they relate
directly to the wave of terrorist attacks which have
occurred since September 11, all of which are said to
have links to Al Qaeda.

To reverse the tide, the spreading of information at
all levels, which counteracts the propaganda campaign
is required.

The truth undermines and overshadows the lie.

And the truth is that the Bush administration is in
fact supporting international terrorism as a pretext to
wage war on Iraq.

Once this truth becomes fully understood, the
legitimacy of the rulers will collapse like a deck of
cards. This is what has to be achieved. But we can only
achieve it, by effectively counteracting the official
propaganda campaign.

The momentum and success of the large anti-war rallies
in the US, the European Union and around the world,
should lay the foundations of a permanent network
composed of tens of thousands of local level anti-war
committees in neighbourhoods, work places, parishes,
schools, universities, etc. It is ultimately through
this network that the legitimacy of those who "rule in
our name will be challenged.

To shunt the Bush Administration's war plans and
disable its propaganda machine, we must, in the months
ahead reach out to our fellow citizens across the land,
in the US, Canada and around the world, to the millions
of ordinary people who have been misled on the causes
and consequences of this war, not to mention the
implications of the Bush Administration's Homeland
Security legislation, which essentially sets in place
the building blocks of a police state.

This initiative requires the spreading of information
in an extensive grassroots network, with a view to
weakening and ultimately disabling the Bush
Administrationís propaganda machine.

When the lies ñ including those concerning September 11
ñ are fully revealed and understood by everybody, the
legitimacy of the Bush Administration will be broken ñ
Big Brother will have no leg to stand on, that is, no
more wars to feed on. While this will not necessarily
result in a fundamental and significant "regime change"
in the US, a new "anti-war consensus" will have
emerged, which will eventually pave the way for a
broader struggle against the New World Order and the
American Empire's quest for global domination.


1. Washington Post, 25 January 2003.

2. Ibid

3 Chicago Sun, 31 December 2002.

4 Reuters, 21 February 2003

5. See Ian Woods, Conspiracy of Silence, McKinney
Vindicated, Global Outlook, No. 2, 2002.

6. Coleen Rowley, Memo To FBI Director Robert Mueller,
quoted in Global Outlook, No. 3, 2003, p. 28.

7. The Boston Globe, 5 June 2002.

8. Insight on the News, 3 February 2003.

9. UPI, 19 December 2002.

10. New York Times, 6 January 2003.

11. Toronto Star, 5 January 2003.

12. The Scotsman, 8 January 2003.

13. UPI, 10 December 2002.

14. AFP, 3 January 2003.

15. See Richard Sanders, War Pretext Incidents, How to
Start a War, Global Outlook, published in two parts,
Issues 2 and 3, 2002-2003.

16.Operation Northwoods, declassified top secret
document sent by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to Secretary
of Defence Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, .

17. William Arkin, The Secret War, The Los Angeles
Times, 27 October 2002.

18. See Michel Chossudovsky, War and Globalisation, The
Truth behind September 11, Global Outlook, 2003,
Chapter 3,

19. See Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help
Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base, Congressional
Press Release, US Congress, 16 January 1997,

20. UPI, 6 January 2002.

21. International Crisis Group, Indonesia Backgrounder:
How The Jemaah Islamiyah Terrorist Network Operates,
, 2003

22, Raymond Bonner and Jane Perlez, More Attacks on
Westerners Are Expected in Indonesia, New York Times,
25 November 2002

23. Quoted in Raymond Bonner and Jane Perlez, op cit.

24. USA Today, 15 October 2002.

25. Business AM, 15 October 2002.

26. Christchurch Press, 22 November 2002), (Similar
warnings were made by the CIA).

27. Operation Northwoods, op cit.

28. Insight on the News, 3 February 2003.

29. Council on Foreign Relations at: ,
Washington 2002.

30. See K. Subrahmanyam, Pakistan is Pursuing Asian
Goals, India Abroad, 3 November 1995.


Supporting evidence that successive US administrations
have supported Al Qaeda is summarized below (references
are provided to a selected bibliography):

The "Islamic Brigades" are a creation of US foreign
policy. In the post-Cold War era, the CIA continues to
support and use Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda in its
covert operations. In standard CIA jargon, Al Qaeda is
categorized as an "intelligence asset".

The U.S. Congress has documented in detail, the links
of Al Qaeda to agencies of the U.S. government during
the civil war in Bosnia-Herzegovina, as well as in
Kosovo and Macedonia.

The evidence confirms that Al Qaeda is supported by
Pakistan's military intelligence, the Inter-services
Intelligence (ISI). Amply documented, the ISI,
allegedly played an undercover role in financing the
9/11 attacks. The ISI has a close working relationship
with the CIA.

Pakistanís ISI has consistently supported various
Islamic terrorist organizations, while also
collaborating with the CIA.

These various terrorist groups supported by Pakistanís
ISI operate with some degree of autonomy in relation to
their covert sponsors, but ultimately they act in the
way which serves US interests.

The CIA keeps track of its "intelligence assets". Amply
documented, Osama bin Laden's whereabouts are known. Al
Qaeda is infiltrated by the CIA. In other words, there
were no "intelligence failures"! The 9-11 terrorists
did not act on their own volition. The suicide
hijackers were instruments in a carefully planned
intelligence operation.

For further details consult: Centre for Research on
Globalization, 9/11 Reader, which constitutes and
extensive bibliography at

See also Michel Chossudovsky, War and Globalisation,
The Truth behind September 11, Global Outlook, 2002 ,

Centre for Research on Globalization, Foreknowledge of
9/11 A Compilation of CRG articles and documents in
support of a 9-11 Investigation,

Michel Chossudovsky is author of 
and Globalisation, the Truth behind September 11 .  He
is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa
and Director of the Centre for Research on
Globalisation which hosts the critically acclaimed
website: .  For details on
ordering Michel  Chossudovsky's recent book,

Copyright  Michel Chossudovsky, CRG  2002. All rights
reserved. Permission is granted to post this text on
non-commercial community internet sites, provided the
source and the URL are indicated, the essay remains
intact and the copyright note is displayed. To publish
this text in printed and/or other forms, including
commercial internet sites and excerpts, contact the CRG
at •••@••.•••.




cyberjournal home page:

"Zen of Global Transformation" home page:

QuayLargo discussion forum:

cj list archives:

newslog list archives:

subscribe addresses for cj list: