The Right’s long history of using violent agents provocateurs to weaken the Left

Submitted to us by the author David Stuart | 12.06.2012 | Analysis | History | Repression | World

Right wing intelligence agencies and police forces have been using violent agents provocateurs to reduce public support for the Left in many countries from the 19th Century to today, as I explain in this detailed article. Violent provocateurs are currently being used, or are allegedly being used in at least 3 countries (the US, UK, and Canada) to reduce public support for the Occupy movement.

The December 15, 2010 “Guardian” article, “Italian opposition asks: Who led Rome riots?”, which was about the fact that “left wing” agents provocateurs were rioting outside the Italian Parliament that month, proves that an old right wing dirty trick, staging “left wing” violence to weaken public support for the Left, is alive and well, so I will discuss numerous examples of the Right using violent agents provocateurs against supporters of various left wing ideologies in many countries, to try to ensure that people are better able to spot such tactics being used in the future.

The Italian Right has a particularly notorious reputation for using that dirty trick, which is why in a July 29, 2001 “Observer” article about the G8 summit in Genoa that year, “‘You could sense the venom and hatred'”, you could read that, “Reports circulated of agents provocateurs who had started the violence, of [anarchist] Black Block activists being dropped off by police vehicles, of right-wingers from Italy and abroad infiltrating their ranks.”

Six days earlier, in “The Guardian” article “Men in black behind chaos”, it was revealed that:

“Other anarchist groups and anti-globalisation protesters are suspicious about the black block’s origins. In Italy, the Green party senator for Genoa, Francesco Martone, alleged that there was a history of collusion between police and neo-fascists to discredit the left. “There is evidence that they have worked together to infiltrate the genuine protesters”, he said.

“Video evidence collected by protesters and the independent media suggests that men in black were seen getting out of police vans near protest marches. They were noted for never attacking the police or the steel wall round the red zone of the city.”

The Italian Right has not confined itself to hiring “left wing” rioters either, as there is plenty of evidence that it has also hired fascist terrorists, including the mentor of BNP leader Nick Griffin, to stage “left wing” bombings, as I will now explain.

The Italian fascist former terrorist who is Nick Griffin’s mentor, is Roberto Fiore, who fled Italy and made his home in Britain after the August 2, 1980 Bologna train station bombing (which killed 85, and injured more than 200), because his fascist terrorist group, the Armed Revolutionary Nuclei, were responsible for what is known in Italy as “the Bologna massacre”.

See 3 online articles, “Italy: Terror on the Right” (“New York Review of Books”, January 22, 1981, Volume 27, Numbers 21 and 22), “Roberto Fiore: from terrorist to entrepreneur…and back again” (“Searchlight”, July 1998), and the “Searchlight” HOPE not hate website’s “Nick Griffin, BNP leader” (December 2008), to learn more about Fiore, the Armed Revolutionary Nuclei, and the Bologna massacre.

The Bologna bombing was initially blamed on an accident, or the communist Red Brigades terrorist group, but it soon became clear that the fascist Armed Revolutionary Nuclei had carried out the bombing, which was presumably designed to weaken support for the then large Italian Communist Party, as Bologna was one of its strongholds.

Left wing members of the Italian Parliament’s 13 year Slaughter Commission, which was investigating the Bologna massacre, and a series of other murderous “communist” and “anarchist” bombings in Italy in the 1960’s, 1970’s, and 1980’s (hence its Slaughter Commission name), concluded that the American CIA, and the Italian elite Masonic lodge P2, which included senior figures in the Italian Parliament, armed forces, secret services, and police forces, were responsible for the bombings, which it is now known were carried out by fascists to create public support for a fascist military coup, and to reduce growing support for anarchist organisations, and for the Communist Party, which over 34% of Italians were voting for by the 1976 election.

Left wing members of the Slaughter Commission were definitely right to blame the CIA and P2, firstly because P2’s fascist Grand Master, Licio Gelli, has admitted that the CIA gave him the 30-31B classified supplement of a publicly available FM 30-31 US Army Field Manual, which, unlike the publicly available manual, was about the use of violent agents provocateurs to discredit the Left. To read about Gelli’s admission that the CIA gave him the US Army manual’s supplement, see page 235 of Dr. Daniele Ganser’s “NATO Secret Armies – Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe” (Franck Cass, London, 2005). Dr. Ganser, who is a Senior Researcher at the Center for Security Studies in Zurich, built on the reports of the Italian, Swiss, and Belgian Parliaments’ investigations into NATO secret armies like Gladio, which was involved in Italian agents provocateurs “left wing” terrorism, to write “NATO’s Secret Armies”.

This December 5, 1990 “Guardian” article, discusses Gladio’s, and thus NATO’s involvement in agents provocateurs “left wing” terrorism:

 http://www.cambridgeclarion.org/press_cuttings/vinciguerra.p2.etc_graun_5dec1990.html

The idea that the CIA could be secretly involved in terrorism which is designed to deceive the public into not supporting the Left, might sound strange to some people, but for one thing, in the first part of Adam Curtis’s “The Power of Nightmares” BBC2 series about modern terrorism, Melvin Goodman, who was in charge of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs from 1986 to 1997, admitted that the CIA’s covert operations wing made up lies about Soviet links to terrorism, and then arranged for them to appear in European newspapers, which proves that CIA covert operators, who would have been the wing of the CIA which would have arranged agents provocateurs terrorism in Italy, are people who believe in deceiving the public by making up lies about Communists.

You can watch “The Power of Nightmares” here:

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt-FyuuWlWQ

A second reason which may prove that the left wing members of the Slaughter Commission were right to blame P2 for the Bologna massacre, is because on page 110 of his international bestseller, “In God’s Name: An Investigation into the Murder of Pope John Paul I” (Constable and Robinson, London, 2007), which is about the theory that P2 poisoned and murdered Pope John Paul I, because he was about to throw Freemasons out of the Vatican, David Yallop mentions the fact that Italian former fascist terrorist Elio Ciolini, who had allegedly been a follower of P2’s fascist Grand Master, Licio Gelli, had alleged that the Bologna bombing was planned at a P2 meeting in Monte Carlo on April 11, 1980.

Bologna was a well known stronghold of the Communist Party, so why would a communist terrorist group bomb the second class passengers’ waiting room at its Central Station? Communists have historically got most of their support from working class people, who were possibly the majority of the people in the second class waiting room on the morning of August 2, 1980.

It is equally absurd to believe that anarchists, who have also historically got most of their support from poorer people (peasant and working class people) should have perpetrated the bombings which they were initially accused of in Italy, as those terrorist atrocities killed or injured many poorer people.

Convicted Italian fascist terrorist Vincenzo Vinciguerra, explained why such bombings killed or injured people who you would not expect communists and anarchists to want to target:

“You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security. This is the political logic that lies behind all the massacres and the bombings which remain unpunished, because the state cannot convict itself or declare itself responsible for what happened.” That statement is from Vincenzo Vinciguerra’s testimony to judge Felice Casson, which was cited by Dr. Daniele Ganser in “NATO’s Secret Armies”, and which can be read here in this extract from that book:

 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/GAN412A.html

Italian judge Guido Salvini indicted US Navy officer David Carrett as a suspect in a December 12, 1969 “anarchist” bombing of Milan’s Piazza Fontana (Fontana Square), which killed 16, and injured 90, and which Vincenzo Vinciguerra has said was the work of fascist terrorists, and, although it should be pointed out that Carrett has never even been tried, never mind convicted for carrying out that bombing, it should also be pointed out, that as Vinciguerra said fascists were responsible, and that as Salvini indicted a US Navy officer as a Piazza Fontana suspect, it is hardly likely that anarchists were responsible for the atrocity.

“The Mother of All Slaughters” chapter of “The Dark Heart of Italy” by Tobias Jones (Faber and Faber, London, 2003), a book which was praised by various right wing, centrist, and left wing British newspapers, reveals that David Carrett was allegedly a CIA agent, which would make sense if the CIA and P2 were running Italy’s “left wing” bombing campaign.

The Piazza Fontana bombing also led to another death, that of Giuseppe Pinelli, an entirely innocent Italian anarchist railway worker, who “fell” to his death from the fourth floor of a Milan police station, while he was being interrogated about his non-existent role in the bombing. Pinelli’s death inspired Dario Fo’s famous 1970 play, “Accidental Death of an Anarchist”, which was broadcast on Channel 4 in 1983, and which has been performed in various British theatres in London, Birmingham, and other places.

Italy is certainly not the only country where the Right have used agents provocateurs in recent years.

A Belgian Parliament (Senate) enquiry revealed in 1991, that in 1984, US Special Forces, and Belgian intelligence officers, had attacked a police barracks in the town of Vielsalm, and had killed a policeman and stolen weapons. That agents provocateurs operation was then blamed on terrorists. See page 25 of Ian Henshall’s “9.11: The New Evidence” (Constable and Robinson, London, 2007), a book which was praised by “The Sunday Times” and the “Daily Mail”, to read about it.

Other Belgian agents provocateurs terrorism was discussed by Philip Coppens in his February-March 2007 “Nexus” magazine article, “State Sponsored Terror in the Western World”, which was partly about the Fighting Communist Cells agents provocateurs group, who were responsible for 28 bombings in 1984 and 1985.

In an August 21, 2007 article, “Police accused of using provocateurs at summit”, the “Toronto Star” discussed evidence, including a YouTube film, which showed that Canadian police had used 3 agents provocateurs during left wing protests against the August 2007 summit of North American leaders.

The same allegations were also discussed by the Canadian equivalent of the BBC, the CBC, in its August 23, 2007 article, “Quebec police admit they went undercover at Montebello protest”.

On October 11, 2000, “The Guardian” article, “Czech Republic: Protests against police brutality”, reported that Prague police had used agents provocateurs against anti-IMF protesters:

“OPH, a Czech independent monitoring group, has also complained about the Czech police’s brutal treatment of prisoners and says it has video and other evidence that the police used agent provocateurs to provoke violence during the Prague demonstrations.

“Radislav Charvat, commander of the Czech police’s IMF/World Bank operations, has admitted that there were “several hundred” undercover police officers on duty on September 26.

“In addition to similar claims by BBC World TV’s reporter and other journalists, the Czech daily Lidove Noviny reported they were dressed like demonstrators and, after committing acts of violence, allowed through police lines.

“According to American journalist Gwendolyn Albert (in 1989 an interpreter for Havel’s anti-communist Civic Forum) in The Prague Post: “It is illegal for undercover police to commit crimes, and these reports raise the question: to what extent was the violence provoked by undercover police?””

In 2009, “The Guardian” reported that British police have also used agents provocateurs against the Left (anti-G20 protesters). Liberal Democrat MP Tom Brake has said that 2 undercover policemen threw bottles at the police, and encouraged other people to do the same, before being accused of being provocateurs by demonstrators, which led them to head for police lines, which they were allowed through after they showed some kind of identification:

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/10/g20-policing-agent-provacateurs

There was nothing new about British police using agents provocateurs either. In his book “The Enemy Within: Thatcher’s Secret War Against the Miners” (Verso, London, 2004), “Guardian” journalist Seumas Milne discusses MI5’s use of violent provocateurs to weaken public support for the miners, and “Express” newspapers journalist Gordon Thomas, whose book, “Inside British Intelligence: 100 Years of MI5 and MI6″ (JR Books, London, 2009), was based partly on interviews with 3 former CIA Directors, and several other former British and American intelligence officers, pointed out on page 81 of that book that, “…[MI5] agents provocateurs stirred up pacifist meetings [during World War One] to allow the Special Branch to arrest people.”

Agents provocateurs are a deception tactic which is usually designed to reduce public support for the Left, so it is less able to redistribute power and wealth from wealthier people to poorer people, but in earlier times, when poorer people did not have to be deceived into voting for the Right, the agents of the Right used other deception tactics to keep poorer people in their place, for example making up lies about rebellions by poorer people against their fantastically wealthy rulers, so they would be discouraged from starting such rebellions in the future.

As Edward Vaillance points out on pages 118-119 of his book, “A Radical History of Britain: Visionaries, Rebels, and Revolutionaries – The Men and Women Who Fought for Our Freedoms” (Little, Brown, London, 2009):

“That the names of Wat Tyler, Jack Straw, John Ball, Jack Cade, and Robert Kett are so familiar to us is a legacy of the enduring power of hostile contemporary sources. These were the work of mediaeval and early modern chroniclers intent on producing propagandist narratives warning the monarch’s subjects of the evils of rebellion and the harsh penalties for revolt. Writers such as Jean Froissart, Thomas Walsingham, Nicholas Sotherton and Alexander Neville presented the [1381 Peasants’ Revolt] uprisings as the work of gullible upstarts, who manipulated the gullible commonalty into supporting their schemes. These narratives set out a simple morality play in which the vaulting ambition and pride of Tyler, Cade and Kett were followed by their inevitable fall and just and exemplary – meaning brutal – punishment. Their supporters likewise received the providential rewards of rebellion: death by hanging, drawing and quartering. After the aberration of popular revolt, the natural order of society was restored, the lower orders reduced to passivity.”

The Russian Tsarist dictatorship also did not have to brainwash people into voting for the Right in elections, but it did have to brainwash them not to support its left wing political opponents. On page 7 of Professor Christopher Andrew’s “The Defence of the Realm: The Authorized History of MI5″ (Penguin, London, 2009), you can read:

“[Superintendent William] Melville [a police officer who went on to become MI5’s chief detective] was probably aware that Rachovsky and other Russian foreign intelligence officers were responsible for a series of explosions and agent provocateur operations on the continent designed to discredit Russian revolutionary emigres.”

Christopher Andrew’s book was vetted by MI5 to ensure that it did not give away information which damaged national security, and includes a foreword by MI5’s Director General, so even MI5 admits that the Right have used agents provocateurs terrorists to weaken public support for the Left in the past.

Spain is another country where the Right has used “left wing” agents provocateurs. On June 24, 2001, the Associated Press news agency had this to say about the Spanish police use of agents provocateurs, in its “Anti-Globalization Protesters Charged” article about the violence at a Barcelona demonstration against the World Bank:

“Reporters saw a group of men and women in masks gathered on the fringes of the demonstration in the park. Some wore earphones, and though carrying sticks they were able to walk freely past police, pull on their masks and position themselves between police and protesters.

“One man in the group grabbed another and pulled him to the ground, and other members of the group began kicking and slugging each other. When demonstrators saw what was going on and joined the fight, the police charged into the park. The masked men and women involved in the scuffle walked through the police line and boarded vans.

“A reporter asked one of them if they were police. He at first said yes, and then said no, before walking by police to the vans.”

The Mexican armed forces have also used agents provocateurs to reduce support for the Left. Mark Kurlansky’s book, “1968: The Year That Rocked the World” (Random House, London, 2005), pointed out on page 335 that, “The [Mexican] students claimed that these and other acts of violence were carried out by military plants to justify the army’s brutal response, an accusation that was largely confirmed by documents released in 1999.”

The right wing (Christian Democrat Chancellor Helmut Kohl led) German Government used the same kind of agents provocateurs dirty trick against German Greens which the Mexican armed forces had used, as the following quotation from pages 65-66 and 67 of “Green Politics: The Global Promise” by Charlene Spretnak and Fritjof Capra (Collins, London, 1983) shows:

“Throughout the summer of 1983, the West German government reiterated its support of the NATO deployment of the Euromissiles that fall and proposed a number of laws to frighten people from joining peace actions. For example, one law declared that if only one person in a crowd is violent, an entire crowd can be arrested. There was widespread belief that the police were employing “agents provocateurs” because violence at demonstrations in the preceding months had broken out mostly in large, open areas where armed police troops were.

“…By the end of summer [of 1983], it had been discovered that an “agent provocateur” (a federal intelligence agent from West Berlin) was among the small group who initiated the violence at Krefeld.”

That arrest a whole crowd for one person’s violence tactic, was even worse than the Nazis’ “Sippenhaft”, or “kin liability” collective punishment law, which prosecuted the relatives of a criminal for his or her crimes, as well as the criminal herself or himself, which, given the Christian Democrats’ Nazi links, is no surprise.

For example, from 1966 to 1969, the Christian Democrat Chancellor was former Nazi Party member Kurt Kiesinger, and from 1979 to 1984, the Christian Democrat President of Germany, who signed the new Sippenhaft type law, was former Nazi Party member Karl Curstens, who had also been a member of the Nazi Party’s extremely violent SA “brownshirts” street thug wing in the 1930’s, which made his signing of the law particularly disgraceful, though not surprising, as fascism seems to have been influential in right wing circles in NATO countries, which is why Spain, Portugal, and Greece all had fascist dictatorships for some of the post World War 2 era, and why Italy is not the only NATO country where the Right plotted to use “left wing” agents provocateurs criminality to create public support for a fascist coup.

On pages 204 and 205 of “The Turkish Mafia: A History of the Heroin Godfathers” (Milo Books, Wrea Green, UK, 2007), by Frank Bovenkerk and Yucel Yesilgoz, which discusses the Turkish Right’s, and Kurdish Communists’ links to criminality (the Turkish Mafia), you can read:

“In the 1970’s, attacks were carried out on public places, such as the arson in the Culture Palace in Istanbul and the sabotage on board the ships Marmara and Eminonu. Left-wing circles were combed to find alleged perpetrators, to no avail. In speculating who was actually behind this, the possibility was suggested that a secret organisation run by the state and the army could have played a role.

“…The secret organisation being hinted at would later be defined by various names: the counterguerilla, the army’s special war department and, finally, Gladio. This was a name that had come to the fore in the late 1980s in Italy as a secret, illicit NATO organisation. Prime Minister Andreotti had made every effort to give evasive answers to questions asked in the Italian parliament, but it gradually became clear, also because the same discussion followed in other countries, that a secret network had been set up in all the NATO countries, on the initiative of the United States and financed by the CIA, with the intention of leading the resistance in the event of a communist invasion and occupation. In Turkey, its history began in 1952. Turkey became a member of NATO on April 4 that year, and in September, Sferberlik Tetkik Kurulu, later to be called Gladio, was set up. Various sources indicate that this was all done on the instructions of the United States, which is confirmed in a publication by the former head of the department in question.

“…There was further mention of such a body [Gladio] from a public prosecutor in Ankara, Dogan Oz. After an extensive investigation, he had discovered that a single organisation had been behind certain murders. In 1978, he wrote a report on the subject to then premier of Turkey, Ecevit: ‘There is such an organisation. It includes people from security forces, such as the army, the police, and the secret service. During the first and second National Front governments, in particular, they largely adapted the state mechanisms to their own purposes. Their ultimate goal is to introduce a fascist system in Turkey, with all the associated organs.’ ”

“The Turkish Mafia” shows that (Kurdish) Communists are as gangster linked as the Turkish Right, but (Chinese) Communists are also as bad as the Right in many countries when it comes to using agents provocateurs, which is why you can read on pages 246-247 of Gordon Thomas’s already cited “Inside British Intelligence: 100 Years of MI5 and MI6″ that, “The images they [GCHQ] downloaded from satellites provided confirmation that the Chinese had used agents provocateurs to start riots, which gave the PLA [People’s Liberation Army] the excuse to move on Lhasa [in Tibet] to kill and wound.”

France is another country where the Right have used agents provocateurs against the Left. Louis Andrieux, the chief of police in Paris from March 1879 to July 1881, even boasted in his memoirs that he had employed a squad of “anarchist” terrorists.

“The Denver Post” article, “ACLU wants probe into police-staged DNC protest” (July 11, 2008), discussed Denver police using agents provocateurs against left wing anti-Democratic Party protesters, so at least one American police force, which almost certainly means the US Right, as American police forces are not renowned for their liberal political leanings, appears to have used the same dirty trick against the American Left.

There is nothing new about the American Right using agents provocateurs against the Left either.

Firstly, the June 30, 1975 “World in Action” documentary, “The Rise and Fall of the CIA”, part 3, discussed the CIA’s funding of the far right Chilean terrorist group Fatherland and Freedom (Patria y Libertad), who set off bombs and started riots to create chaos, as part of the CIA’s attempts to weaken support for, and bring down Chile’s democratically elected left wing leader, Salvador Allende.

Secondly, “The Student Revolt: The Activists Speak” (Penguin, London, 1968), a book which featured interviews with leaders of the 1968 student rebellion in France, revealed that the CIA had offered the students money, and that they had turned it down. The CIA was presumably aware that rioting communist, anarchist, and situationist students would make the French Right more popular. The total right wing vote was significantly bigger in the June 1968 French election than in the March 1967 French election, so if that was why the CIA offered to fund the students, they were right to believe that the rioting would increase the right wing vote.

Thirdly, even a journalist from Rupert Murdoch’s right wing Fox News admitted in an article for the Moonie owned far right “Washington Times”, that after studying declassified FBI files which discussed the infamous May 4, 1970 Ohio National Guard shootings at Kent State University in Ohio, which killed 4 students, it became clear to him that an FBI agent provocateur had fired shots before the National Guard had started shooting at Kent state students, which means that the FBI provocateur had possibly been ordered to trick the National Guard into opening fire:

“It also turned out that the FBI had its own informant and agent-provocateur roaming the crowd, a part-time Kent State student named Terry Norman, who had a camera. Mr. Norman also was armed with a snub-nosed revolver that FBI ballistics tests, first declassified in 1977, concluded had indeed been discharged on that day.

“Then there was the testimony of an ROTC cadet whose identity remains unknown, one of the pervasive redactions concealing the names of all the FBI agents who conducted the interviews and of all those whom they interrogated. Although presumably angry over the demonstrators’ destruction of the campus ROTC building, the cadet’s calm, precise firsthand account nonetheless carries a credibility not easily dismissed.

“Before the fatal volley, the ROTC cadet told the FBI, he “heard one round, a pause, two rounds, and then the [National Guard] M-1s opened up.”

“The report continued that the cadet “stated that the first three rounds were definitely not M-1s. He said they could possibly have been a .45 caliber…”

You can read that article here:

 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/04/new-light-shed-on-kent-state-killings/?page=2

The Ohio shootings scared much of the white American Left into abandoning politics, so the FBI may well have wanted the shootings to frighten the Left into losing interest in politics.

The black American Left had been massively weakened 2 years earlier by another act of right wing violence, the assassination of Martin Luther King, which robbed the black Left of its most inspiring leader, at a time when it was about to start the Poor People’s Campaign, an Occupy Wall Street type tent protest in Washington DC, which was designed to bring the black and white Left together to make poverty history in the US, by demanding a guaranteed minimum income for all Americans.

Of course, a PPC led by Martin Luther King, would have attracted national and international media attention, and would, as a result, have created significant American public support for a left wing wealth redistribution measure which wealthy and powerful right wing Americans opposed, so a King led PPC would undoubtedly have been targeted by agents provocateurs, because the campaign which King saw as the dress rehearsal for the PPC, the garbage workers’ strike in Memphis, during which he was assassinated, was plagued by rioters, the Invaders, who are now known to have been working in at least some cases for the FBI, as the December 28, 2011 Yesterday channel documentary, “The Sixties: The Decade That Shaped a Generation”, which was made for the American PBS channel pointed out.

As a December 2011 Pew Research poll showed that the Occupy movement is quite popular with the American public (44% of Americans back it, and 35% oppose it), it is not surprising that the Occupy groups around the US have already become a target for provocateurs. This article in the British news magazine “The Week”, discusses a right wing provocateur who admits to having infiltrated the Washington DC group Occupy DC:

 http://theweek.com/article/index/220144/the-agent-provocateur-who-infiltrated-occupy-wall-street

The below Occupy Wall Street website posting, and many other website articles and YouTube clips, discuss alleged agents provocateurs who are trying to discredit Occupy groups. The below posting is just about alleged Oakland, California provocateurs the Oakland Liberation Front, but you can quickly find a lot of other articles and clips about alleged provocateurs who have been trying to reduce public support for Occupy groups in New York, London, Los Angeles, Toronto, Philadelphia, Denver, Cleveland, Tampa, Hawaii, and New Jersey (Trenton, and Jersey City):

 http://occupywallst.org/forum/agents-provocateurs-posing-today-as-the-oakland-li/

This particularly good article by 2 Occupy DC activists, is about not just the use of provocateurs to discredit various American Occupy groups, but also other old FBI COINTELPRO (Counter Intelligence Program) type tactics, which are clearly being used to disrupt and divide Occupy groups around the US, so they do not grow:

 http://www.sott.net/articles/show/242299-The-Agent-Provocateurs-in-Occupy-s-Midst

This article on the PBS television station website, is about the modern FBI possibly using old COINTELPRO tactics, which date from the era of the far right FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, who, as I will explain in a moment, was popular with the late American Nazi Party leader Lincoln Rockwell:

 http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/cointelpro.html

One reason why Occupy groups seem to be attracting provocateurs, may be the fact that the global Occupy network called for a May 1, 2012 worldwide general strike, which was obviously an idea that the Right would not have been happy about, partly as the global general strike idea may well become annual, and may well grow in popularity as word about it spreads:

 http://www.occupynetwork.tv/events/general-strike-worldwide-may-1-2012

Former CIA “contract agent” (a person who works on a contract by contract basis, as opposed to a full time basis for an intelligence agency), and former Republican Party candidate for Congress Robert Morrow, stated in his book, “First Hand Knowledge: How I Participated in the CIA-Mafia Murder of President Kennedy” (SPI, New York, 1992), that he was duped by the CIA into buying guns which were used in the assassination of John F. Kennedy, which was blamed on the Left (supposed communist Lee Harvey Oswald). Morrow says that he was told the guns were to be used to kill a South American leader, but was then told by an anti-Castro Cuban CIA agent, that they were to be used to shoot Kennedy.

Robert Morrow’s book, which names plenty of names of men who he alleges were involved in John F. Kennedy’s shooting, alleges that his former CIA colleagues told him who was responsible for the assassination.

Gus Russo, an investigative journalist who has worked for the PBS “Frontline” programme, whose book, “Live By the Sword: The Secret War Against Castro”, was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, and who worked as a consultant for Oliver Stone’s “JFK” film about President Kennedy’s assassination, said of Robert Morrow’s book: “”First Hand Knowledge” is explosive. Having spent a good deal of time verifying the story, I believe it to be true…crucial to understanding the Kennedy assassination. A must-read.” See the back of Morrow’s book to read that quotation.

One of the men who Robert Morrow alleges was involved in John F. Kennedy’s death, was the late oil multimillionaire Clint Murchison, who used to fund the American Nazi Party, according to pages 205-206 of “Official and Confidential: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover” (Pocket Books, New York, 1993) by Anthony Summers, whose biography of that late far right Republican FBI Director, created a lot of media attention in the US, because of his claim that Hoover was a secret transvestite who liked to wear a pink dress. Summers also pointed out that the grammatically challenged late American Nazi Party leader Lincoln Rockwell, once described Hoover as “our kind of people”.

When the liberal John F. Kennedy was killed, the American Nazi Party’s kind of man, J. Edgar Hoover, was the FBI’s Director, which may explain why, according to Tip O’ Neill, the former speaker of the US House of Representatives, and friend of the Kennedys, the FBI twisted witness testimony to suit their Lee Harvey Oswald was “the lone nut” assassin case. O’ Neill said in “Beyond JFK: The Question of Conspiracy”, a documentary video which accompanied the director’s cut video of Oliver Stone’s “JFK” film, that Kennedy aides Ken O’ Donnell and Dave Powers told him they were persuaded by the FBI to change their testimony that they heard gunfire from behind the picket fence on the famous grassy knoll in Dealey Plaza, Dallas.

Gunfire from behind the fence would have meant that there was more than one assassin in Dealey Plaza, and when you have more than one assassin, you have a conspiracy scenario rather than a lone nut scenario, which means that the public and the media are more likely to demand to know if anyone else was involved.

It would of course hardly be surprising if a neo-Nazi like Clint Murchison had been involved in a conspiracy to assassinate a liberal politician which was blamed on a supposed communist, because the German Nazis famously arranged for a disturbed Dutch “council communist” (council communism is a now pretty much extinct type of communist thought), Marinus van der Lubbe, to burn down the German Parliament, so they could have an excuse to violently suppress German democracy, and the large German Communist Party.

It would also hardly be surprising if Clint Murchison had been involved in the Kennedy assassination, because other powerful far right Americans were plotting to stage “Communist” murders of Americans in the early 1960’s.

According to an accidentally declassified, 1962 Operation NORTHWOODS Pentagon Joint Chiefs of Staff document, which is discussed in a book by James Bamford, a former Washington DC Investigative Producer for ABC Television’s “World News Tonight” programme, “Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency” (Doubleday, New York, 2001), the Joint Chiefs of Staff planned to begin “Cuban Communist” plane hijackings and terrorist bombings in the US in the early 1960’s, to create public support for a war on Cuba. Bamford describes NORTHWOODS as the most corrupt plan ever conceived by the US Government.

The document was accidentally declassified because the Pentagon was told to allow the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Review Board, a US Government agency which is a division of the US National Archives and Records Administration, to look through its files, as the ARRB was charged with declassifying US Government documents which related to the John F. Kennedy assassination.

NORTHWOODS was among approximately 1500 pages of 1962-1964 US Government documents relating to Kennedy and Johnson Administrations policy towards Fidel Castro’s Communist dictatorship, which the ARRB decided to declassify. The NORTHWOODS plan has nothing to do with the President Kennedy assassination, but it was presented to the Kennedy Administration, who did not agree with the Pentagon’s proposed “Cuban Communist” terrorist attacks against Americans, which led to the document being filed away until it was stumbled upon by the ARRB 3 decades later.

See the US Government (National Archives) online press release, “Media Advisory: National Archives Releases Additional Materials Reviewed by the Assassination Records Review Board” (November 17, 1997), for the announcement that roughly 1500 pages of documents were being released to the public.

On April 30, 2001, the National Security Archive, a non-profit research and archival institution at the George Washington University in Washington DC, posted a photocopy of the entire 15 page original Joint Chiefs of Staff NORTHWOODS document here on its website:

 http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf

Not surprisingly, the accidental declassification of the NORTHWOODS document, and, to a lesser extent, the subsequent discovery that the anthrax which was used in the germ warfare attacks of autumn 2001, more than likely came from an American military laboratory, as “New Scientist” magazine explained in this article, has led some understandably suspicious people to point to the similarities between elements of the NORTHWOODS Pentagon agents provocateurs plan to persuade the American public to support an invasion of Cuba, and the September 11 and anthrax attacks, which persuaded the US public to support an invasion of Afghanistan, and then Iraq, because most Americans believed the Bush Administration lie that Saddam Hussein had something to do with those attacks:

 http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2265-anthrax-attack-bug-identical-to-army-strain.html

While I am not going to say that the attacks were an agents provocateurs “inside job”, because there is no “smoking gun” which proves that they were, I am going to make some important points about the official version of events, partly because the attacks have given the very right wing security services new powers to monitor and detain people, including theoretically the Left, and partly because they have weakened support for the Left in Europe in particular, as since 9/11, some people have decided to vote for authoritarian right wing parties, which fraudulently pose as the strongest opponents of authoritarian right wing Islamists, who they actually have a lot in common with, which is why BNP leader Nick Griffin was once a big supporter of the Iranian Islamist tyranny, as the below BBC News article points out, which is why the Saudi royal family supported the Nazis in World War 2, which is why the Syrian regime’s Ba’ath Party, which, like Saddam Hussein’s Ba’ath Party, was originally inspired by the Nazis, is in an alliance with the Iranian Islamist tyranny, and which is why right wing British parties are noted for having the same kind of sexist and homophobic views as Islamists, and the same racist views as many Islamists, for example the Arab Islamist regime in Northern Sudan, which has been massacring black people in Southern Sudan and, more recently, Darfur for decades, and the Arab Islamist leaders of the Arab League, for example the Saudis, who refuse to condemn Northern Sudan’s decades long mass murder of black people:

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/programmes/2001/bnp_special/the_leader/biography.stm

British Conservative politicians routinely make sexist comments in Parliament about female politicians, and want more children to go to faith schools, where they will be taught sexism and homophobia which will help to perpetuate Islamism, and thus Islamist terrorism.

By contrast, the libertarian and left wing British Greens want to close most faith schools, by taking their charitable status off them, and are stronger supporters of women’s rights, lesbian and gay rights, and racial minority rights than other more authoritarian parties, which is why green parties have had 50% female politicians for 3 decades, for example in Germany since the 1983 election, which is partly why the Greens are now the largest party in large lesbian and gay population Brighton, where their 23 (out of 60) Councillors run a minority administration, and which is why the Greens want to build a museum to highlight the contribution which immigration has made to Britain.

The 2008 American Green Party candidate for President, former Democrat Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, has been criticised for calling for a full investigation into the September 11 attacks, but in this October 2011 article, she pointed to the US Government’s involvement in Gladio terrorism in Europe, and to the NORTHWOODS plan, so she has every reason to demand a full investigation, which the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States whitewash certainly was not:

 http://sfbayview.com/2011/america%E2%80%99s-conquest-of-africa-introduction-by-cynthia-mckinney/

The Commission was initially headed by Henry Kissinger, which led this “New York Times” article to allege that President Bush chose him because it wanted “to contain an investigation it long opposed”, which, as Kissinger famously hid the US Air Force’s illegal bombing of Cambodia that he oversaw from the American Congress, media, and public, as this BBC News article points out, was a reasonable allegation:

 http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/29/opinion/the-kissinger-commission.html

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/2000/newsmakers/1952981.stm

It is not difficult to prove that the Commission was not a full investigation.

For example, Gordon Thomas, whose already cited book, “Inside British Intelligence: 100 Years of MI5 and MI6″ (JR Books, London, 2009), was based partly on interviews with 3 former CIA Directors, and several other former British and American intelligence officers, states on page 15: “An MI6 document in December 2006 claimed, “There are now over 300 members of the Saudi royal family providing money to al-Qaeda.””

So for one thing, the Commission either knew nothing about, or chose to cover up the fact that more than 300 members of the Saudi royal family are allegedly funding Al-Qaeda.

Secondly, the Commission either knew nothing about, or chose to cover up the fact that Saudi “charities” fund Al-Qaeda, as former US Justice Department Nazi war criminal hunter John Loftus, who got the American branches of those charities shut down, explained in this speech, whose transcript has been posted on the website of the US Navy Seals, who of course killed Osama bin Laden:

 http://www.navyseals.com/muslim-brotherhood-nazis-and-al-qaeda

Thirdly, the Commission either knew nothing about, or chose to cover up the fact that, as this October 9, 2001 “Times of India” article points out, the FBI confirmed an Indian tip off that the then Pakistani Inter Services Intelligence chief, Lieutenant General Mahmud Ahmad, wired $100,000 to Mohammed Atta, the hijacker who led the attacks:

 http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2001-10-09/india/27243646_1_isi-link-evidence-india

The next day, the “Wall Street Journal” also mentioned the fact that General Mahmud Ahmad had sent Mohammed Atta $100,000, as did this April 8, 2004 “Asia Times” article, which also revealed Democratic Party Senator Bob Graham’s surprise that there was evidence of foreign government involvement in the attacks:

 http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FD08Aa01.html

Fourthly, the Commission either knew nothing about, or chose to cover up the fact that the FBI has not extradited Mahmud Ahmad to the US, to stand trial for funding a terrorist, and to explain why he sent $100,000 to Mohammed Atta.

Of course, the attacks, and the subsequent Al-Qaeda bogeyman hysteria, have been very useful to very right wing organisations like the FBI, as they have influenced much of the Western public to vote for right wing parties that they were not voting for before September 11, 2001, and have influenced politicians to give more money to security services like the FBI.

This already mentioned BBC2 documentary series, “The Power of Nightmares”, showed how right wing politicians, and very right wing security services, have exaggerated the Islamist terror threat, for obvious vote winning and budget increasing reasons:

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt-FyuuWlWQ

The American and British security services in particular, have no reason to moralise about Al-Qaeda terrorism, as they have had links to Al-Qaeda figures, and the Muslim Brotherhood group which Al-Qaeda grew out of, since the 1940’s in the case of MI6, because MI6 and the CIA have long seen Islamists as useful far right allies against nationalist and left wing organisations in the Islamic world, for example in the CIA and MI6 backed war against Soviet backed Afghan Communists.

Hence the title of this BBC News article, “‘Al-Qaeda assassin worked for MI6′, secret cables claim”:

 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13191959

Former US Justice Department Nazi war criminal hunter John Loftus, discusses the long history of MI6 links to the Muslim Brotherhood in this already cited speech, which you can read the transcript of on the US Navy Seals site:

 http://www.navyseals.com/muslim-brotherhood-nazis-and-al-qaeda

Mark Curtis, who used to work as a research fellow at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, which is the main British Foreign Office think tank, used declassified British Government documents, and other sources, to write 2 books which explain in great detail the long history of MI6, and to a lesser extent CIA collusion with Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Qaeda type people, “Secret Affairs: Britain’s Collusion with Radical Islam” (Serpent’s Tail, London, 2010), and “Dirty Wars: Britain’s Collusion with Radical Islam” (Verso, London, 2008).

Mark Curtis also wrote about British collusion with “radical Islam” in this “Guardian” article:

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/05/bin-laden-radical-islam-collusion

In a 1984 article for his “World in Review” magazine, “What Really Happened in Iran”, former MI6 officer John Coleman even claimed that the Muslim Brotherhood was set up by British intelligence officers like T. E. Lawrence, and St. John Philby, to keep the Muslim world backward, so its oil could be looted. The religiosity which the Brotherhood promotes, does keep the Muslim world scientifically backward of course.

“The London Bombings: An Independent Inquiry” (Gerald Duckworth, London, 2006), by Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed, also includes a detailed discussion of MI6’s links to Al-Qaeda, and Islamist terrorists in general, and points out on page 274 that, “Although British authorities quickly backtracked on what they had confirmed in the press about [Haroon Rashid] Aswat’s involvement in 7/7 after revelations from US intelligence sources that Aswat is an MI6 double agent, US and French investigators continue to describe Aswat as the London bombings mastermind (see pp.144-151)”.

On page 150 of Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed’s book, you can also read about how the “mastermind” of the London bombings was allowed to enter the UK, despite being on a terrorist watch list.

The CIA likes to claim publicly that it has never had anything to do with Osama bin Laden, and that it ran the Afghan war against the Soviet Union, which involved Bin Laden and other Arab volunteers, who became the nucleus of Al-Qaeda, through Afghan fighters, but in the already cited BBC2 “Power of Nightmares” documentary, a CIA field officer who was involved in that war from 1985 to 1989, Milton Bearden, directly contradicted that claim, by saying that he and his fellow CIA men did have direct contact with the Arabs, who he said were very awkward to deal with, because their views were so extreme.

Gordon Thomas’s already cited book, “Inside British Intelligence”, also directly contradicted that claim, by stating on page 304: “Even to the CIA officers he [Bin Laden] fought alongside, he remained a withdrawn figure, speaking to them only through an interpreter…”.

The CIA’s past links to Osama bin Laden, are of course a fifth subject which the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States either knew nothing about, or chose to cover up.

Those past links continued into the 1990’s. The US State Department had said in 1998, that the Kosovo Liberation Army was a terrorist group which funded itself by selling heroin, and which accepted funding and training from Osama bin Laden, as this November 13, 2001 “War on terrorism skipped the KLA” article in the conservative Canadian newspaper the “National Post” pointed out, but that did not stop the CIA helping the KLA to fight Slobodan Milosevic, as this March 12, 2000 BBC2 documentary, “Moral Combat: NATO at War”, which is now on YouTube revealed:

 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/BIS111A.html

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oc_WAqWri9I

On March 31, 1999, the US Senate Republican (Party) Policy Committee released this article, “The Kosovo Liberation Army: Does Clinton Policy Support Group with Terror, Drug Ties?”, which is primarily based on articles in the major media and the authoritative journal “Jane’s Intelligence Review”, and which discusses the KLA’s links to the heroin trade, terrorism, and Osama bin Laden in more detail than the above “National Post” story:

 http://rpc.senate.gov/releases/1999/fr033199.htm

A heroin dealing terrorist group which was funded and trained by Osama bin Laden, are converted into “freedom fighters” when the US Government and NATO suddenly need soldiers to fight Slobodan Milosevic! George Orwell, who predicted in “1984” that in his future dystopia, yesterday’s mortal enemy would be today’s close ally, would indeed have said “I told you so.”

Another example of George Orwell’s prediction coming true, was the recent war in Libya, where Al-Qaeda terrorists were converted into “freedom fighters” because NATO suddenly needed soldiers to fight against Colonel Gaddafi. The title of this “Daily Telegraph” article, “Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have Al-Qaeda links”, in which that rebel commander, Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, praises his Al-Qaeda fighters, needs no comment:

 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html

A second “Daily Telegraph” article discusses another Al-Qaeda “freedom fighter” who helped to overthrow Colonel Gaddafi, Abdulhakim Belhadj, the leader of the main anti-Gaddafi militia in Tripoli:

 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8742248/Should-MI6-have-come-in-from-the-cold.html
The fact that, as Rupert Murdoch’s “Village Voice” New York magazine pointed out on March 30, 1993, a CIA officer gave 1993 World Trade Center bomber Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman a visa to enter the US, despite the fact that he was on a terrorist watch list, is a sixth subject which the Commission ignored. That fact was also mentioned by the May 1996 issue of the “Atlantic Monthly” magazine.

This “New York Times” article, “CIA Officers Played Role In Sheik Visas”, revealed that the CIA also let the Sheikh enter the US 6 times between 1986 and 1990, which is a seventh issue that the Commission did not look into:

 http://www.nytimes.com/1993/07/22/nyregion/cia-officers-played-role-in-sheik-visas.html

A second “New York Times” article, “CIA Officer Signed Visa For Sheik, US Says”, blamed a Sudanese employee of the US Embassy in Khartoum for the CIA officer’s decision to give a man on a terrorist watch list a visa, which was officially described as an innocent blunder, despite the fact that the CIA made the same supposedly innocent blunder on multiple occasions:

 http://www.nytimes.com/1993/07/14/nyregion/cia-officer-signed-visa-for-sheik-us-says.html

That supposedly innocent blunder, clearly inspired the 1996 Hollywood film “The Long Kiss Goodnight”, which starred Geena Davis and Samuel L. Jackson, as the CIA giving a 1993 World Trade Center bomber a visa was mentioned by one of the film’s characters, who heads a covert operations unit within the US State Department, which plans to set off a chemical bomb that can be blamed on “the Muslims”, so the unit can get a budget increase from Congress.

“The Boston Herald” reported on February 26, 1993, that the CIA had also admitted to being “partially culpable” for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, because it had trained and supported some of the bombers in the past. The same newspaper reported on January 24, 1994, that, “CIA support also made it easier for alleged terrorist leaders to enter the country.” So that is another subject which the Commission did not explore.

Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman, who was involved in the CIA backed war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, was of course one of the World Trade Center bombers who the CIA had trained and supported.

On pages 302-303 of former “World in Action” journalist Richard Belfield’s book, “Hitmen and Assassinations: An Expose of Political Hits, Killers and Their Paymasters” (Constable and Robinson, London, 2011), Belfield, who has made other documentaries for ITV, and for the BBC, claims that the late President of Egypt, Anwar Sadat, whose 1981 assassination the Sheikh was suspected of being involved in, because he signed a fatwa which called for Sadat to be be killed, though he was never convicted of being part of the Islamic Jihad group’s assassination conspiracy, was killed because the CIA had decided that he could no longer be trusted, and that he should be replaced by his deputy, Hosni Mubarak.

Richard Belfield does not reveal the source for his claims on pages 302-303, which allege that President Sadat’s CIA trained guards, who were supposed to protect him, were, “stood down and marshalled 60 metres behind the podium, where they could do nothing to protect the president”, and that, “Two weeks before the assassination, they [the assassins] were given a deep background briefing from a rogue ex-CIA case officer turned international arms dealer, Ed Wilson. The subject on the agenda: Sadat’s security arrangements.” However, on page vii of the “Acknowledgements” section at the start of his book, he does thank “General Nabawy Ismail, who was kind with his time and hospitality and explained many of the mysteries behind the Sadat assassination.” So was Ismail, who was Sadat’s Minister of the Interior, the source for Belfield’s claims, which are important, because the Sadat conspirators later helped to found Al-Qaeda?

Whether General Ismail was the source for Belfield’s claims or not, if those claims are correct, the Commission also did not look into the CIA’s, Pentagon’s, and FBI’s links, or possible links, to other Islamist terrorists in the Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman mould.

For example, the current leader of Al-Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who was one of the hundreds of Islamist militants who were arrested as suspects after Anwar Sadat’s assassination, though he was cleared of being involved in the conspiracy, was allowed to enter the US in 1993, as the Pulitzer Prize winning American “New Yorker” magazine journalist Lawrence Wright pointed out on page 179 of his book, “The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11″ (Alfred Knopf, New York, 2006). Was another “innocent blunder” responsible for allowing Al-Qaeda’s current leader into the US? If it was, it was a very big blunder, because Al-Zawahiri became a very prominent Islamist militant as a result of the trial which followed Sadat’s assassination, as he became the spokesman of the suspects, and addressed the world’s media from the large court room cage in which the militants were kept during the trial.

Another top Al-Qaeda terrorist who definitely did work for the CIA, and then later for the FBI, was, as this “San Francisco Chronicle” article explains, Ali Mohamed, who brought Ayman al-Zawahiri to the US. He also planned Al-Qaeda’s Nairobi bombing, which killed more than 200 people:

 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/11/04/MN117081.DTL

Top Al-Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki even dined at the Pentagon months after 9/11, as this CBS News story explained:

 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/10/21/national/main6978200.shtml

The fact that the anthrax which was used in the autumn 2001 germ warfare attacks, more than likely came from a Pentagon laboratory, is another subject which the Commission did not investigate, and MI6’s past links to Al-Qaeda, are an eleventh subject which the Commission did not look into.

The US Justice Department now believes that the anthrax attacks were carried out by a lone nut type character, the late American military scientist Bruce Ivins:

 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/09/washington/09anthrax.html#

Of course, the CIA, MI6, the FBI, and the Pentagon are not the only organisations who hypocritically moralise about Islamist terrorism.

As “The Guardian”‘s Moscow correspondent Luke Harding pointed out on page 177 of his book about Russia, “Mafia State” (The Guardian, London, 2012), 2 Russian FSB officers were caught red handed planting supposedly Chechen terrorist bombs in Ryazan. Chechen terrorism has weakened the Russian Left, by creating a nationalist, make war on Chechnya mentality which benefits the Right.

If some left wing group had had links to Al-Qaeda, or was more than likely the source of the anthrax which was used in the post September 11 germ warfare attacks, I am sure that the very right wing security services would have made sure that the media learned about those facts, but those security services are less keen to use the media to publicise the CIA’s, the Pentagon’s, the FBI’s, and MI6’s past Al-Qaeda links, or possible links, and a Pentagon laboratory’s probable link to the anthrax attacks.

Nor are the very right wing security services keen to publicise assassinations which do not involve the Left, as they were the work of the Right, for example, the fact that US President Eisenhower ordered the assassination of Congo’s democratically elected leader Patrice Lumumba. See “The Guardian” article, “President ‘ordered murder’ of Congo leader” (August 10, 2010), to read about that case, which was also discussed in a January 3, 2012 Channel 5 documentary, “Bourne Identity: The True Story”, which mentioned the fact that Eisenhower ordered the assassination of Lumumba.

British Conservative Prime Minister Anthony Eden also ordered an assassination of a world leader, of Egyptian nationalist dictator Gamal Abdel Nasser, as this transcript on the website of the US Council on Foreign Relations, which is the main think tank for the US State Department reveals:

 http://www.cfr.org/hungary/hungary-suez-crisis-fifty-years-session-1-suez-crisis-rush-transcript-federal-news-service/p11833

There is one final example of the Right using violent agents provocateurs to reduce support for the Left which I will discuss. For reasons which will become clear, to explain that example, I first have to mention the major media allegations that the CIA sells hard drugs.

In 1996, Jeremy Paxman told “Newsnight” viewers about the storm of controversy in the US which had followed articles in the “San Jose Mercury News”, that claimed the CIA had covertly sold crack in the US to fund the far right Contra guerillas and terrorists, who were fighting the by 1984 democratically elected left wing and liberal Sandinista Government in Nicaragua. The author of the articles, the late Gary Webb, later wrote a book, “Dark Alliance: The CIA, the Contras, and the Crack Cocaine Explosion” (Seven Stories Press, New York, 1998), which alleged that all of the American journalists who were leading the attacks on him in the US media that followed his covert CIA crack trafficking stories, had CIA connections, which, as his reports could have caused the CIA a lot of problems with American politicians and the American public, if the US media as a whole had decided that they were true, was hardly surprising.

ITV also investigated the CIA crack trafficking claims, and found new evidence to substantiate them, which it explained in its December 12, 1996 documentary, “The Big Story”.

However, as long ago as June 16, 1975, ITV’s “World in Action” had mentioned CIA hard drug (opium) trafficking, in the first part of its 3 part documentary, “The Rise and Fall of the CIA”, which is on the third of the 3 DVD compilations of old “World in Action” documentaries which have been issued so far.

A Peruvian court case which involved the CIA informant who headed Peru’s SIN intelligence agency, Vladimiro Montesinos, being put on trial for cocaine trafficking, embezzlement, running a death squad, bribery, and selling arms to Colombia’s cocaine trafficking, supposedly communist FARC guerillas, not only revealed that the CIA is in bed with cocaine traffickers, but also showed that FARC are CIA provocateurs.

As the following quotation from a long article on Montesinos in the “Financial Times” Saturday magazine of July 26, 2003 shows, his court case, which later led to multiple convictions, has proved that the CIA sold arms to FARC:

“On August 21, Montesinos held his first press conference to trumpet a significant success in the war against the rebels. He claimed he had broken an international ring smuggling tens of thousands of Jordanian AK-47 assault rifles to the FARC. In a farcical turnaround, however, the story fell apart when the accused arms dealers spoke out and Montesinos himself was unmasked as the mastermind behind the scheme.

“The idea that the CIA’s man in Peru was aiding the FARC rebels at a time when the Clinton administration was launching a major drive to defeat them caused a great deal of consternation back in Washington. Questions deepened when it transpired that Jordan [which provided the weapons to FARC] had checked with the CIA about the arms sale and that it had approved the deal. State Department officials seethed that they had not been notified by the CIA of the deal earlier and accused it of withholding information.”

Why should the CIA covertly sell arms through Jordan to supposedly communist cocaine traffickers? in my opinion, to ensure that FARC CIA provocateurs, who are the reason that Colombia is the only Latin American country in South America, except Peru, where the Left have not dominated politics in recent years, are able to keep supplying the CIA with cocaine to sell in the US, are able to keep discrediting the Left in Colombia, and are able to keep fooling the American public into thinking that “commies” are responsible for selling cocaine to their country.

Why should the CIA choose Jordan to supply arms to FARC? As this February 19, 1977 “New York Times” article revealed, the CIA gave secret “cash payments” to the late King Hussein of Jordan, so evidently Jordan is a country where the CIA has friends in high places:

 http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00C13F63E5D167493CBA81789D85F438785F9

Peru is also plagued by “communist” (Shining Path) guerilla violence, and that Maoist group are also involved in cocaine trafficking, as an article about them on page 53 of the March 3-9, 2012 issue of “The Economist” explains, but there is no evidence at the moment that they are secretly armed by the CIA, in return for cocaine which can be sold in the US.

If the CIA is secretly backing a Maoist guerilla group, it would not be the first time that that has happened of course. John Pilger discussed the CIA’s covert backing for the Chinese backed, Maoist Khmer Rouge guerillas, who were violently opposed, for ideological reasons, to the Soviet backed Vietnamese Communists who had defeated the US, in this April 17, 2000 “New Statesman” article, “How Thatcher gave Pol Pot a hand”:

 http://www.newstatesman.com/200004170017

Because of the violent, far right, covert behaviour of US intelligence agencies which this article has discussed, it is not surprising that a very right wing US intelligence agency is responsible for the biggest far right covert crime in history, which has been driving people across the entire world in a politically fascist direction for 3 decades, as I explain in this article:

 https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2012/05/496511.html

David Stuart