Real History: Roots of the US “War on Terrorism”: The Pathology of Empire

Covert Action Quarterly (formerly Covert Action Information Bulletin) was a lone voice of real history for many years before it closed down.  A kind of left-wing version of Infowars, years before Alex Jones came along.  This guy says it well:

During my Cold War days in US intelligence in Europe, we had a full set of a continually growing archive of CAQ within our SCIF library alongside Jane’s Defence and other notable publications we were to be aware of and use as source material, as well as to see who knew what or if someone was hot on the trail or uncovering an operation – the Perpetrators of State Crime, with whom I worked, loved to hate CAQ…

I find it comically ironic as an intelligence veteran to fight against the same apparatus now, pissing into their “eyes only” punchbowl of compartmentalized kool-aid drinking cubicle dwellers espousing “if you only knew what I knew…”, but from the other side of the fence and to have the privilege of having Lou as a friend in the same fight. …

Covert Action Quarterly was the best left-wing magazine I’ve ever read.  For years I sought it out at the news stand, often checking multiple  times trying not to miss an issue. (I can’t remember why I didn’t subscribe to it. Maybe I did at one time.) For more than a decade I’ve gone back to their sadly pathetic website, and only on the last visit did I find any material worth reading. CAQ, in my opinion, beat the  pants off The Nation — even when it was still worth reading. It beat the pants off of the early Mother Jones, back when it was actually  radical. It beat the pants off of Z Magazine, even in Z’s heyday. It even beat the pants off the print version of CounterPunch. I can’t think  of a single other magazine that so impressed me. …

This incisive and carefully researched article originally published by Covert Action Quarterly in 1999 sheds light with tremendous foresight on the historical evolution of the  US  led  “War on Terrorism” and the articulation of what has been described as “Global NATO”.

The online version of this article was first published by Global Research ten years ago in September 2002.

Michel Chossudovsky, December 5,  2012


Secretary of State Madeleine Albright referred to the August 1998 missile assaults against Sudan and Afghanistan (allegedly in retaliation for the U.S. embassy bombings in Africa two weeks earlier) as “unfortunately, the war of the future.” (1) In one sense, she was lamenting the likelihood of various Islamic forces retaliating against American civilian targets.

There is, as Albright understands, another side to these wars, more than guided missiles launched from a thousand miles away, with no danger to U.S. troops. American military strategy calls for “the use of overwhelming force to minimize United States casualties.”(2) But it is not that simple. Former CIA Director Robert Gates was more precise:

“[O]ur people and our Government must accept another reality: as potential official American targets are ‘hardened,’ terrorists will simply turn to non-official targets- businesses, schools, tourists and so on. We can perhaps channel the threat away from the United States Government, but not away from Americans.”(3)

What grand scheme, then, is in place, that may bring these “unfortunate” wars back home, against civilians? Recent U.S. strategy, to implement the administration’s self-appointed role as global policeman, is now defined by its evolving military unilateralism, at home and abroad. …

It’s hard to believe that well-meaning grownups could be so clueless as to participate in such a consumately corrupt business model of creating the very problems they claim to be  fighting.  Self-delusion is rampant in the national security state.  Eisenhower’s farewell speech fell on deaf ears, tragically.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.