‘Pentagon’s hand behind French intervention in Mali’

20130121-074512.jpg
French soldiers walk past a hangar they are staying at the Malian army air base in Bamako. (Reuters / Joe Penney)

By RT, interview of William ENGDAHL

As French soldiers pour into Mali in the fight to push back the advancing Islamist militants, questions have been raised as to the motives behind the intervention. Author William Engdahl told RT the US was using France as a scapegoat to save face.

RT: At a time when France and the rest of the Eurozone are trying to weather the economic crisis, what’s Paris seeking to gain by getting involved in another conflict overseas?

William Engdahl: Well, I think the intervention in Mali is another follow-up to the French role in other destabilizations that we’ve seen, especially in Libya last year with the toppling of the Gadhafi regime. In a sense this is French neocolonialism in action.

But, interestingly enough, I think behind the French intervention is the very strong hand of the US Pentagon which has been preparing this partitioning of Mali, which it is now looming to be, between northern Mali, where al-Qaeda and other terrorists are supposedly the cause for French military intervention, andsouthern Mali, which is a more agricultural region. Because in northern Mali recently there have been huge finds of oil discovered, so that leads one to think that it’s very convenient that these armed rebels spill over the border from Libya last year and just at the same time a US-trained military captain creates a coup d’état in the Southern capital of Mali and installs a dictatorial regime against one of Africa’s few democratically elected presidents.

So this whole thing bears the imprint of US Africom [US Africa Command] and an attempt to militarize the whole region and its resources. Mali is a strategic lynchpin in that. It borders Algeria which is one of the top goals of these various NATO interventions from France, the US and other sides. Mauritania, the Ivory Coast, Guinea, Burkina Faso. All of this area is just swimming in untapped resources, whether it be gold, manganese, copper.

RT: Why was France the first Western country to get involved to such an extent? And what sort of message is this military initiative sending to its allies?

WE: Well I think that’s the Obama Administration’s strategy – let France take the hit on this as they did in Libya and other places in the past year and-a-half and the US will try and play a more discrete role in the background rather than being upfront as they were in Iraq and Afghanistan which cost the US huge amounts of credibility around the world. They’re playing a little bit more of a sly game here, but the rush for the US to announce its support the French military intervention and the actions of Africom over the past year and-a-half, two years ,in Mali make clear that this is a US operation with the French as a junior partner.

Continue reading

US Military and Black Operations: Where Is the Line?

20121214-172409.jpg
By Luis MIRANDA, The Real Agenda for The Intel Hub

Just as public and corporate partnerships have merged over the past two decades, so has the connection between the worlds most corrupt terrorist agency – the CIA – and the United States Department of Defense.

Given the unsuccessful operations in Iraq and Afghanistan after declaring war on both nations to hunt those who ghost organizations that the United States itself created and managed, the White House agreed to give the CIA even more power to carry out so-called anti-terrorist operations abroad, which are terrorist operations against non-aligned regimes.

Recent examples of these terror operations are the actions taken by the CIA previous and during the Arab Spring in Egypt, Libya and now in Syria, where western forces including NATO and CIA operatives launched attacks from Turkey into the kingdom of Bashar al-Assad.

The new powers given to the CIA include enhancing its operations with the latest surveillance technology, for example unmanned armed remotely controlled drones which are operated by the Pentagon under CIA direction.

It is not a surprise that the U.S. Government decided to switch the head of the CIA and the commander of military operations in the Middle East last year in an attempt to homogenize the operations of both government organizations.

The White House has also increased the spy network that works directly with the Pentagon to exercise a greater control over terrorist plots in the Arab Peninsula, Africa and Asia.

The move to inadvertently combine the power of both the CIA and the Pentagon began more actively under the George W. Bush administration, but rapidly accelerated under the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama.

The CIA has grown its operations over territories supposedly taken over jihadists, but not to combat their operations.

The U.S. Government managed to buy off terrorists groups as it did in Afghanistan back in the 1970s with a group known today as al-Qaeda.

The flow of drug money and other funds laundered by large banking corporations fuel the bribery system that allows the CIA to keep certain key terrorist groups working for them, as supposed to against U.S. Interest in some of the most volatile regions of the planet.

The merge of the CIA and the Pentagon was completed after the 2011 summer directive issued by Barack H. Obama to have the then CIA Director, Leon Panetta, take over the United States Department of Defense, while David Petraeus, the most influential ground operations commander in Iraq and Afghanistan was named the head of the Central Intelligence Agency.

General David Petraeus left the CIA last november after he allegedly admitted to have had an extramarital affair with his biographer. Of course, it is unlikely such an affair was the real reason Petraeus left the spy agency. Former intelligence insiders believe it was Petraeus opposition to America’s way of conducting military and intelligence operations what made him leave his post as the top spy chief.

Petraeus is not the first top General to exit U.S. military entities. Two or three other strong men inside the military were fired or asked to be relieved of their duties due to their disagreements with the way combat missions were being conducted.

Continue reading

Dommages Collatéraux : la face cachée d’un terrorisme d’État

Par Guillaume de Rouville

La démocratie ambiguë – de Guillaume de Rouville

Lors des guerres menées par les États-Unis depuis la chute du mur de Berlin au nom d’une certaine idée de leur puissance, est apparue une notion, celle de « dommages collatéraux », qui a été utilisée par les organes des relations publiques du Pentagone pour justifier et faire accepter aux opinions occidentales des actes de guerre provocant des victimes civiles. Ces dommages collatéraux ne seraient pas souhaités par la puissance militaire qui déplore ces tragiques erreurs, fruits de renseignements erronés ou d’une technologie défaillante.

Or, a y regarder de plus près, on s’aperçoit que la plupart de ces actes de guerre ayant détruit la vie de milliers de civils en Afghanistan, en Irak, en Libye ces dernières années [1], ne sont pas des erreurs, des dommages collatéraux d’une entreprise militaire qui ne prendrait pour cible que des soldats en uniforme appartenant à la partie adverse, mais bien des actes délibérés visant à tuer des femmes, des enfants et des hommes sans défense.

On pourrait se demander dans quels buts de telles horreurs seraient entreprises. La doctrine militaire répond : pour imposer la terreur source de toute obéissance. Continue reading

U.S. Super Soldiers Of The Future Will Be Genetically Modified Transhumans Capable Of Superhuman Feats

By Michael, on August 12th, 2012

The future of war is going to look really, really weird.  The “super soldier” research that DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) is working on right now is unlike anything we have ever seen before.  If DARPA is successful, and if the American people don’t object, the soldiers of the future will be genetically modified transhumans capable of superhuman feats.  Do you want a soldier that can run faster than Usain Bolt?  DARPA is working on that.  Do you want a soldier that won’t need food or sleep for days?  DARPA is working on that?  Do you want a soldier that can regrow lost limbs?  DARPA is working on that.  Do you want a soldier that can outlift Olympic weightlifters and that can communicate telepathically?  DARPA is working on that.  Americans flock to movies about superheroes and mutants, and soon they may actually have real life “superheroes” and “mutants” fighting their wars for them.  But at what cost?

A recent Daily Mail article detailed many of the strange research projects that DARPA is working on right now.  The fact that DARPA has actually allowed these projects to be revealed in the mainstream media probably means that the development stage is nearly over and they are ready to try to convince a wary public to accept them…. Continue reading

“Pentagram”: 2,000 US Dead In Afghan War (How About 10,000 !)

20120615-184728.jpg
Image from ISAF photostream

RT

2,000 dead Americans: The toll of the Afghan War (so far)

The United States’ war in Afghanistan reached a new milestone this week when the death toll of Americans killed in the decade-long Operation Enduring Freedom reached 2,000.

The US Department of Defense reports this week thatCpl. Taylor J. Baune, 21, of Andover, Minnesota lost his life in Helmand province, Afghanistan on Wednesday. The marine wed his high-school sweetheart earlier this year, only to be deployed overseas by the military and killed just three months later. The Pentagon has not released information about the cause of death.

Continue reading

Pentagon releases results of 13,000-mph test flight over Pacific

An artist's rendering of the Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle 2. (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency / April 20, 2012)

By W.J. Hennigan (for The Los Angeles Times)April 20, 2012
The results are in from last summer’s attempt to test new technology that would provide the Pentagon with a lightning-fast vehicle, capable of delivering a military strike anywhere in the world in less than an hour.In August the Pentagon’s research arm, known as the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, carried out a test flight of an experimental aircraft capable of traveling at 20 times the speed of sound.

The arrowhead-shaped unmanned aircraft, dubbed Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle 2, blasted off from Vandenberg Air Force Base, northwest of Santa Barbara, into the upper reaches of the Earth’s atmosphere aboard an eight-story Minotaur IV rocket made by Orbital Sciences Corp. Continue reading

Pentagon has no records of Osama bin Laden’s death

Fellowship of the Minds

20120402-013942.jpg

Obama touts the Navy SEALS’ raid and killing of Osama bin Laden in his hideaway compound in Abbotabad, Pakistan, as one of, if not the greatest, achievements of his administration. Reportedly, the administration even disclosed details of the raid to Hollywood for an upcoming movie, Zero Dark Thirty, directed by Kathryn Bigelow.

The movie is scheduled to be released — SURPRISE! — on October 12, 2012, within a month of the presidential election.

Joseph Straw reports for the N.Y. Daily News, Aug. 11, 2011, that the CIA defended its collaboration with the maker of Zero Dark Thirty. CIA spokesman Preston Golson said that such collaboration with filmmakers has precedent and is part of the CIA’s “public outreach.” Despite the CIA’s insistence, Congressman Peter King (R-Long Island), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, has demanded that the Pentagon and CIA inspectors general investigate whether the agencies breached policy in this case, in particular whether the filmmakers saw classified material or got access to personnel working under cover.

Given that, it is curious, to say the least, that, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request made by the Associated Press, the Pentagon says it has no records — not one photo, not one video, not even an e-mail — of bin Laden’s death?

20120402-014326.jpg

Richard Lardner reports for the Minneapolis Star Tribune, March 15, 2012:

Government officials have openly discussed details of the mission [to kill Osama bin Laden] in speeches, interviews and television appearances, but the administration won’t disclose records that would confirm their narrative of that fateful night. The Associated Press asked for files about the raid in more than 20 separate [FOIA] requests, mostly submitted the day after bin Laden’s death.

The Pentagon told the AP this month it could not locate any photographs or video taken during the raid or showing bin Laden’s body. It also said it could not find any images of bin Laden’s body on the Navy aircraft carrier where the al-Qaida leader’s body was taken.

The Pentagon said it could not find any death certificate, autopsy report or results of DNA identification tests for bin Laden, or any pre-raid materials discussing how the government planned to dispose of bin Laden’s body if he were killed.

It said it searched files at the Pentagon, U.S. Special Operations Command in Tampa, Fla., and the Navy command in San Diego that controls the USS Carl Vinson, the aircraft carrier used in the mission.

The Defense Department told the AP in late February it could not find any emails about the bin Laden mission or his “Geronimo” code name that were sent or received in the year before the raid by William McRaven, the three-star admiral at the Joint Special Operations Command who organized and oversaw the mission. It also could not find any emails from other senior officers who would have been involved in the mission’s planning.

————–

Note: WantToKnow team member Prof. David Ray Griffin, in his book Osama bin Laden: Dead or Alive?, lays out the extensive evidence that bin laden died in December 2001, and that since that time Pentagon psyops had been keeping him “alive” with fake videos and audiotapes to maintain a crucial pretext for the ever-expanding “war on terror.” Could it be that the Pentagon will produce no records of its purported “death raid” because in fact it will reveal major manipulations involving bin Laden’s death?

On August 6, 2011, three months after the supposed killing of bin Laden, 22 members of the exact same Navy SEALS Team 6 who had conducted the Abbotabad raid all died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.

Dead men don’t tell tales.

H/t beloved Joseph

~Eowyn

Pentagon Launches Desperate Damage Control Over Shocking Panetta Testimony

The United States has ceded control of its affairs to international bureaucrats

By Paul Joseph Watson at Infowars.com

Alex Jones: “This represents absolute 100 per cent proof that the military industrial complex which runs the United States is under the control of foreign central banks who are imposing a military dictatorship.”

The Pentagon is engaging in damage control after shocking testimony yesterday by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta at a Senate Armed Services Committee congressional hearing during which it was confirmed that the U.S. government is now completely beholden to international power structures and that the legislative branch is a worthless relic.

During the hearing yesterday Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence.

Panetta was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions, “We spend our time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected representatives of the United States. As you go forward, will you consult with the United States Congress?”

The Defense Secretary responded “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress.”

Despite Sessions’ repeated efforts to get Panetta to acknowledge that the United States Congress is supreme to the likes of NATO and the UN, Panetta exalted the power of international bodies over the US legislative branch.

“I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “I don’t believe it’s close to being correct. They provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”

Panetta’s assertion that he would seek “international permission” before ‘informing’ Congress about the actions of the US military provoked a firestorm of controversy, prompting the Pentagon to engage in damage control by claiming Panetta’s comments were misinterpreted.

“He was re-emphasizing the need for an international mandate. We are not ceding U.S. decision-making authority to some foreign body,” a defense official told CNN.

However, this is not the first time that the authority of international bodies has been framed as being superior to the US Congress and the Constitution.

In June last year, President Obama arrogantly expressed his hostility to the rule of law when he dismissed the need to get congressional authorization to commit the United States to a military intervention in Libya, churlishly dismissing criticism and remarking, “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question.”

Obama tried to legitimize his failure to obtain Congressional approval for military involvement by sending a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner in which he said the military assault was “authorized by the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council.”

Panetta’s testimony that the US looks to obtain “international permission” before it acts, allied with Obama citing the UN as the supreme authority while trashing the power of Congress, prove that the United States has ceded control over its own affairs to unelected international bureaucrats, just as the countries of the European Union have done likewise.

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.

Coup D’etat in the USA: Pentagon & Obama Declare Congress Ceremonial

Congressman Jones introduces bill that would subject Panetta & Obama to impeachment

By Paul Joseph Watson at Infowars.com

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s testimony asserting that the United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military, words which effectively declare Congress a ceremonial relic, have prompted Congressman Walter Jones to introduce a resolution that re-affirms such behavior as an “impeachable high crime and misdemeanor” under the Constitution.

During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence.

Panetta was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions, “We spend our time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected representatives of the United States. As you go forward, will you consult with the United States Congress?”

The Defense Secretary responded “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress.”

Despite Sessions’ repeated efforts to get Panetta to acknowledge that the United States Congress is supreme to the likes of NATO and the UN, Panetta exalted the power of international bodies over the US legislative branch.

“I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “I don’t believe it’s close to being correct. They provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”

In an effort to re-affirm the fact that “the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution,” Republican Congressman Walter Jones has introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives.

The Full Text Reads:

Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.
Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.

Under the terms of Jones’ resolution, both Panetta and Obama would be subject to impeachment for abusing their power and violating the Constitution in disregarding the authority of Congress and placing a foreign power above its jurisdiction.

Despite the Pentagon’s efforts to claim that Panetta’s words were misinterpreted, the Obama administration itself has routinely cited the authority of the United Nations in relation to last year’s invasion of Libya, which was conducted without approval from Congress.

In June last year, President Obama arrogantly expressed his hostility to the rule of law when he dismissed the need to get congressional authorization to commit the United States to a military intervention in Libya, churlishly dismissing criticism and remarking, “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question.”

Obama tried to legitimize his failure to obtain Congressional approval for military involvement by sending a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner in which he said the military assault was “authorized by the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council.”

In boldly asserting the authority of international powers over and above the legislative branch, Panetta and Obama are openly declaring that they no longer represent the American people and instead are water carriers for a global dictatorship that has usurped the sovereignty of the United States.

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.