Once again, U.S. intelligence agencies were useless.

List of Chapters | Main Menu | Contact | About Futurepower ®

Once again, U.S. intelligence agencies were useless.

U.S. government agencies were useless in preventing the second attack on the World Trade Center towers, on September 11, 2001. A former CIA employee explains why Osama bin Laden, who is presumed to be the organizer of the attack, has little to fear from the U.S. government in an article in the July/August 2001 edition of The Atlantic Monthly, The Counter-terrorist Myth [theatlantic.com] This article is also useful because it gives some idea of what really happens inside one of the U.S. government's secret agencies.

Whenever the U.S. has a global problem, there seem to be two situations that often go together: 1) The U.S. government intelligence agencies say they did not foresee the problem, and 2) the intelligence agencies had a years-long prior involvement with the person or organization that caused the problem. Osama bin Laden is one example of this.

Another example is General Noriega of Panama who had a working relationship with the U.S. CIA for years before he was accused of selling drugs. Was the exposure of Noriega caused by his not taking orders? A quick Google search engine [google.com] search for "General Noriega Panama CIA" [google.com] gave a link to a chapter in a book by Noam Chomsky, The invasion of Panama [zmag.org]. Chomsky's book is called What Uncle Sam Really Wants [zmag.org].

Another link on the first Google page was, The Real Drug Lords: A brief history of CIA involvement in the Drug Trade [magnet.ch] by William Blum. These sources came from a quick Google search [google.com]. Possibly better sources could be found. (Many people consider Google to be the best search engine.)

Possibly there are parts of the U.S. government that no longer serve the purpose of democracy. If this is true, it seems not to be a political conspiracy, but instead widespread government corruption caused by individuals using the secret agencies to make money and to advance their own personal purposes.

Most people have little idea of how money is transferred from the U.S. government to private individuals using the secret agencies. Here are just four examples:

Suppose that a dictator has a particular military budget. If the U.S. is persuaded to help defend the dictator's country, the dictator is now able to reduce the amount spent by his country, and still have the same security. The dictator can put the difference into his own bank account. Notice that, legally, none of the U.S. taxpayer's money went into the dictator's bank account, but effectively, it did. The dictator may then give some of the money to the individuals who arranged for the U.S. support.

Sometimes the U.S. government authorizes the sale of weapons to another country fighting a war. Sometimes the U.S. gives the weapons without asking for payment. Generally the country to which the U.S. is making contributions had been buying weapons at full price. When the U.S. makes a donation, or sells weapons cheaply, the country then has extra money available. It is easy for someone connected with a secret U.S. agency to arrange to be paid for causing the authorization. The secrecy makes the chance of detection very small.

Equipment and weapons supplied by the U.S. government can be sold to buyers who are not connected with the conflict for which the weapons were supplied. It can be claimed that the equipment was lost in war.

Money is transferred from the U.S. government to U.S. weapons manufacturers by giving U.S. military aid to one side of a conflict and requiring that the money be spent to buy weapons from U.S. manufacturers. The new weapons cause the conflict to escalate. This is seen as justification to give more U.S. military aid. This method of embezzlement doesn't require involvement by secret agencies. However, secret agencies hasten this process by going into an already unstable conflict and de-stabilizing it further.

The U.S. is the world's largest weapons manufacturer [thirdworldtraveler.com]. The World Policy Institute [worldpolicy.org], in a May 1995 article, Weapons at War said, "In the past ten years, parties to 45 current conflicts have taken delivery of over $42 billion worth of U.S. weaponry."

The report also says, "Two of the men convicted in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing received weapons training in Afghanistan under the direction of fundamentalist Islamic forces that were armed and trained by the CIA."

Note that the U.S. refused to sign [icbl.org, International Campaign to Ban Landmines] the Treaty Banning the Manufacture of Land Mines [un.org, United Nations] even though land mines maim children [unicef.org, United Nations Children's Fund].

We cannot expect people, who believe that killing other people is a way of solving problems, to be moral in other areas of life.

List of Chapters | Main Menu | Contact | About Futurepower ® | Go to top