Visit our website: HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---------------------------------------------


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Walter Lippmann 
 
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 9:43 AM
Subject:  CIA's Tracks Lead in Disastrous Circle


CIA's Tracks Lead in Disastrous Circle
By Robert Scheer
Published September 17, 2001
in the Los Angeles Times


So, we've come full circle. The CIA, which originally helped
train Osama bin Laden and many of the other terrorists who
have turned against us, now will have its powers expanded to
do more of the same.

Of course, the CIA did not traffic with Islamic fanatics on
its own initiative but was following a policy proclaimed by
President Reagan of support for "the valiant and courageous
Afghan freedom fighters."

There's something absurd in the sentiment of congressional
leaders, who the New York Times reported Sunday "have
concluded that American spy agencies should be allowed to
combat terrorism with more aggressive tactics, including the
hiring of unsavory foreign agents." When did the CIA stop
hiring "unsavory" agents? Like Bin Laden, the CIA recruited
"freedom fighters" from throughout the Islamic world to
overthrow the secular government in Kabul that was backed by
the Soviets.

Bin Laden was no minor recruit to the cause but, given his
wealthy father's close ties to the Saudi royal family, was
received by the Afghans and Pakistanis on the highest levels
and embraced by them up to the days preceding the disastrous
attack on the U.S.

Bin Laden turned against the U.S. as a consequence of the Gulf
War, when the Saudi leadership rejected his advice to rely on
native fighters and instead turned over the country's defense
to the U.S. military, which overwhelmed that underpopulated
desert kingdom with the bravado of more than half a million
troops. The much-proclaimed success of former President Bush's
Gulf War, despite the enormous civilian "collateral damage"-a
horror never acknowledged in this country-did not topple
Saddam Hussein but left a bitter trail of anti-U.S. fervor.
When Bin Laden returned to Afghanistan, he found many willing
Muslim recruits. Like Bin Laden, those identified as the
perpetrators of the recent debacle were raised in the bosom of
indulgent Arab oil states that financed their education
abroad, including years of flight school for at least one of
the Saudi pilots who smashed into the World Trade Center.
They're far more skilled than the terrorists of the past.

But it's nonsense to suggest that the CIA has been hamstrung
in going after Bin Laden, when President Clinton specifically
empowered it to do so three years ago. As Bob Woodward and
Vernon Loeb reported in the Washington Post last week : "The
CIA has been authorized since 1998 to use covert means to
disrupt and preempt terrorist operations planned abroad by
Saudi extremist Osama bin Laden under a directive signed by
President Bill Clinton and reaffirmed by President Bush this
year, according to government sources."

Bin Laden's operation has been under constant surveillance;
Clinton ordered the blasting of his training camps in response
to a previous terrorist attack. If Bin Laden was responsible
for this most recent attack, it represents nothing less than a
startling failure of U.S. intelligence.

Ironically, under our new president, U.S. policy even had
tilted toward the view that we could work with the Taliban
thugs who have harbored Bin Laden, as evidenced last May when
U.S. drug enforcement officials visited the country and
celebrated that regime's success in limiting opium production.
"Taliban's Ban on Poppy a Success, U.S. Aides Say" was the New
York Times headline, with glowing endorsements from U.S.
officials. The story reported, "The sudden turnaround by the
Taliban, a move that left international drug experts stunned
... opens the way for American aid to the Afghan farmers who
have stopped planting poppies. On [May 17], Secretary of State
Colin L. Powell announced a $43-million grant to Afghanistan
in additional emergency aid to cope with the effects of a
prolonged drought. The United States has become the biggest
donor to help Afghanistan in the drought." Powell issued a
statement that the U.S. would "continue to look for ways to
provide more assistance to the Afghans."

This is typical of the mixed signals we've been sending. Call
it what you will, even humanitarian aid, and funnel it through
the United Nations, but the effect is the same: to send to the
Taliban a signal that its support of Bin Laden has been
somehow acceptable.

>From the beginning, over the last 20 years, our entire Afghan
policy has provided a reminder of the dangers of "blowback," a
phrase used to describe the turning of the machinations of
U.S. intelligence agencies against our own nation. Yet, in the
desperation of the moment, Congress now wants to empower the
CIA to do more of the same.
Copyright © 2001 Robert Scheer

http://www.robertscheer.com/1_natcolumn/01_columns/091701.htm


























 

-------------------------------------------------
This Discussion List is the follow-up for the old stopnato @listbot.com that has been 
shut down

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://TOPICA.COM/u/?a84x2u.a9spWA
Or send an email To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================

Reply via email to