Yesterday, I published parts 9 and 10, concerning the arrest and interrogation of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the lone surviving defendant in the Boston bombing. Taken together, the sections so far sketch a picture which indicates that something is not right about the government’s story, at least as presented in the mass media.
In some important respects, the narrative doesn’t make sense. Before I try to describe some key unanswered questions, it may be useful to consider another factor. Since the attacks on the World Trade Center buildings in September, 2001, the United States has seen its entire federal government distorted into a security state. In order to retain public support for what in other times would seem radically dangerous policies of police behavior and limitations on freedom, the government has exploited public fears and dramatized supposed interventions which, we are told, stopped ‘terrorist plots.’
But, as independent research has proved, two-thirds of the known incidents have been instigated not by ‘terrorists’ but by government agencies. A recent feature in the New York Times, in fact, noted that of 22 claimed attempts at domestic attacks, 14 of them were actually instigated by the FBI.
Since the FBI is involved in the Boston bombing case, not only as an investigative body but as an agency which had considerable connections to Tamerlan Tsarnaev as early as a year ago, it is instructive to examine its recent history.
11. Terrorism in the U.S.A.
While senior members of Congress continue to make fools of themselves defending massive NSA spying on every American, including themselves, because they deem such a complete destruction of the Constitution necessary to shield us from ‘terrorism,’ it’s instructive to consider what ‘terrorism’ actually means.
There has always been violence which governments describe as terrorism. In short, terrorism is generally the violence of an insurgency or rebellion against the government in control. Until September 11, 2001, attacks against Americans or American institutions have always taken place in other countries, usually where the United States was trying to impose its will against an indigenous people.
The September 11 assault led to what any reasonably sane person would consider a great overreaction. With Americans badly scared, a country unused to experiencing itself a level of violence its own policy-makers have routinely visited upon other peoples reacted by declaring a ‘war on terror,’ the main characteristic of which was the passage of dangerously intrusive legislation and the creation of the world’s largest domestic security apparatus. As I write this, construction is underway in Washington on the largest government building ever built, the future home of the Department of Homeland Security. This department didn’t even exist twelve years ago.
As every dictator has learned, the easiest way to impose one’s will on a people is to scare them. A government can then offer security at a price, and most people, perhaps not terribly aware of what’s going on and ignorant of the damage the sacrifice of one’s rights brings, will agree.
On Wednesday, July 24, the House of Representatives turned down, by a vote of 217 to 205, an amendment to House Resolution 2397, which would have cut off funding for a portion of the most sweeping surveillance conducted by the U.S. military’s spy apparatus, the NSA. In a sense, given the intense lobbying of the Obama regime against this measure, it’s impressive that 205 representatives, including 111 Democrats, had the guts to support the Constitution. But the Constitution lost, and the immediate effect of this vote is that the national legislature has ratified a dangerous and manifestly illegal program far more at home in a police state than in a democracy.
Fear is the moving force here, at least with most Americans, and ignorance. For the truth of terrorist acts inside the United States is that they are exceedingly rare.
Between 2001 and 2012, according to a review conducted by journalists at the New York Times, there were 22 incidents which could be so described, in each case stopped by law enforcement. But of those 22, 14 were actually instigated by the FBI itself.
Evidently, the FBI, for its own reasons, through undercover agents, has itself given birth to a more than dozen terrorist plots, then arrested the suckers it had drawn into participating. Here are some classic examples, described by David K. Shipler in the New York Times of April 28, in an article headlined: “Terrorist Plots Hatched By FBI.
“Of 22 ‘terrorist plots’ since 9-11 inside the U.S., at least 14 were created by FBI as sting operations. In these, undercover agents posed as terrorists offering dummy missiles, fake C-4 explosives, a disarmed suicide vest...
“The plots included a plan to suicide bomb the Capitol; bomb synagogues, shoot Stinger missiles at military planes; and fly explosives-laden model planes into the Pentagon and Capitol.
“The FBI coaxes people into planning these acts, then busts them. The defense of entrapment usually doesn’t work because it’s hard to show the defendant never had a predisposition without FBI help, although that’s logically true.
“Prior to 9/11 it would be very unusual for the F.B.I. to present a crime opportunity that wasn’t in the scope of the activities that a person was already involved in,” said Mike German of the American Civil Liberties Union, a lawyer and former F.B.I. agent who infiltrated white supremacist groups.
“Typically, the stings initially target suspects for pure speech — comments to an informer outside a mosque, angry postings on Web sites, e-mails with radicals overseas — then woo them into relationships with informers, who are often convicted felons working in exchange for leniency, or with F.B.I. agents posing as members of Al Qaeda or other groups.”
“The process goes like this. Here’s how James Cromitie was recruited to bomb synagogues and fire Stinger missiles at U.S. planes:
“Cromitie was a low-level drug dealer with a criminal record that included no violence or hate crime, despite his rants against Jews. The informer, Shahed Hussain, had been charged with fraud, but avoided prison and deportation by working undercover in another investigation. He was being paid by the F.B.I. to pose as a wealthy Pakistani with ties to Jaish-e-Mohammed, a terrorist group that Mr. Cromitie apparently had never heard of before they met by chance in the parking lot of a mosque.
“Brother, did you ever try to do anything for the cause of Islam?” Mr. Hussain asked at one point.
“O.K., brother,” Mr. Cromitie replied warily, “where you going with this, brother?”
Two days later, the informer told him, “Allah has more work for you to do,” and added, “Revelation is going to come in your dreams that you have to do this thing, O.K.?” About 15 minutes later, Mr. Hussain proposed the idea of using missiles, saying he could get them in a container from China. Mr. Cromitie laughed.
“I don’t want anyone to get hurt,” Mr. Cromitie said, and then explained that he meant women and children. “I don’t care if it’s a whole synagogue of men.” It took 11 months of meandering discussion and a promise of $250,000 to lead him, with three co-conspirators he recruited, to plant fake bombs at two Riverdale synagogues.
“Only the government could have made a ‘terrorist’ out of Mr. Cromitie, whose buffoonery is positively Shakespearean in its scope,” said Judge Colleen McMahon, sentencing him to 25 years. She branded it a “fantasy terror operation” but called his attempt “beyond despicable” and rejected his claim of entrapment.
“In late September 2011, AFP reported that a man was charged with “planning to fly explosive-packed, remote controlled airplanes into the Pentagon and the Capitol in Washington.” In its report, “US man charged with Pentagon bomb plot,” AFP stated:
“During the alleged plot, undercover FBI agents posed as accomplices who supplied Ferdaus with one remote-controlled plane, C4 explosives, and small arms that he allegedly envisioned using in a simultaneous ground assault in Washington.
“However, ”the public was never in danger from the explosive devices, which were controlled by undercover FBI employees,” the FBI said.
“Ferdaus was arrested in Framingham, near Boston, immediately after putting the newly delivered weapons into a storage container, the FBI said.
“Authorities described Ferdaus as a physics graduate from Northeastern University who followed al-Qaeda and was committed to ”violent jihad” since early last year.
“In November 2010, a similar “plot” was engineered, then “disrupted,” also by the FBI – this time in Portland, Oregon. The so-called “Christmas Tree Bomber” attempted to remote detonate a van he believed was filled with explosives, provided by the FBI, before being arrested during a Christmas tree lighting ceremony at Pioneer Courthouse Square. The FBI’s official statement regarding the incident revealed that FBI agents had handled, even detonated live explosives with the entrapped suspect at Lincoln County Park in the lead up to the final failed bombing.
“The FBI’s official statement titled, “Oregon Resident Arrested in Plot to Bomb Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony in Portland,” released by the U.S. Attorney’s Office on November 26, 2010 stated (emphasis added):
“According to the affidavit, on November 4, 2010, Mohamud and the undercover FBI operatives traveled to a remote location in Lincoln County, Ore., where they detonated a bomb concealed in a backpack as a trial run for the upcoming attack. Afterwards, on the drive back to Corvallis, undercover FBI operatives questioned Mohamud as to whether he was capable of looking at the bodies of those who would be killed in the upcoming attack in Portland. According to the affidavit, Mohamud responded, “I want whoever is attending that event to leave, to leave either dead or injured.”
“Upon returning to Corvallis that same day, the affidavit alleges that Mohamud recorded a video of himself with the undercover FBI operatives in which he read a written statement that offered a rationale for his bomb attack. On Nov. 18, 2010, undercover FBI operatives picked up Mohamud to travel to Portland in order to finalize the details of the attack.
“Earlier this evening, Mohamud was arrested after he attempted to remotely detonate what he believed to be explosives in a van that was parked near the Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Portland, the affidavit alleges.
“Yet another similar operation was carried out by the FBI in February 2012, where yet another otherwise incapable patsy was provided with live explosives in the lead up to what was ultimately a failed suicide bombing at the US Capitol. USA Today reported in their article, “FBI foils alleged suicide bomb attack on U.S. Capitol.”
“According to a counterterrorism official, El Khalifi “expressed interest in killing at least 30 people and considered targeting a building in Alexandria and a restaurant, synagogue and a place where military personnel gather in Washington before he settled on the Capitol after canvassing that area a couple of times,” the Associated Press writes. During the year-long investigation, El Khalifi detonated explosives at a quarry in the capital region with undercover operatives. He is not believed to be affiliated with al-Qaeda, officials said.
“The frightening trend of the FBI cultivating otherwise incapable “terror” suspects, providing them with and detonating real explosives, before giving them inert or controlled devices to carry out attacks on public targets where mass casualties are averted only at the last possible moment, sets the stage for at the very least, incredible potential for catastrophic blunders, and at worst, false flag attacks.
“Has the FBI ever presided over “sting operations” that were actually carried out? The answer is yes. The FBI in fact was presiding over the terrorists who carried out the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. The role of the FBI leading up to the deadly attack would most likely have gone unreported had an FBI informant not taped his conversations with FBI agents after growing suspicious during the uncover operation. The New York Times in their article, “Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast,” reported:
“Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center, and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after the blast.
“The informer was to have helped the plotters build the bomb and supply the fake powder, but the plan was called off by an F.B.I. supervisor who had other ideas about how the informer, Emad A. Salem, should be used, the informer said.
“The account, which is given in the transcript of hundreds of hours of tape recordings Mr. Salem secretly made of his talks with law-enforcement agents, portrays the authorities as in a far better position than previously known to foil the Feb. 26 bombing of New York City’s tallest towers. The explosion left six people dead, more than 1,000 injured and damages in excess of half a billion dollars.
What the Times investigation shows is an FBI at the center of perpetuating America’s terror menace, not at the forefront of fighting it. With every attack foiled or carried out involving FBI uncover operatives revealed only after successful “stings” or in the case of the World Trade Center bombings, an inconvenient witness stepping forward and revealing the FBI’s role, the first and foremost suspect considered after any bombing on US soil should be the FBI itself.
Tomorrow: Part 12: A Witness Dies In Florida.