History of the American Empire

We begin the publication of the last part of Thierry Meyssan’s book, “Before Our Very Eyes”. He rereads the history of the American Empire. In this episode he comes back to the attacks of September 11 as the seizure of Power by the direct descendants of the Pilgrim Fathers against the descendants of the authors of the Bill of Rights.

This article is an extract from the book Fake wars and big lies.

THE ARAB SPRINGS ORGANISED BY
WASHINGTON AND LONDON

When the Soviet Union collapsed, the US elite believed that a period of commerce and prosperity would follow the Cold War. However, a section of the military-industrial complex imposed rearmament in 1995, followed by a very aggressive imperialist policy in 2001. This faction, which identifies itself with the « Continuity of Government » group, stood ready to take over power in case of the destruction of elected institutions. It prepared the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in advance, although they were not launched until after September 11, 2001. Faced with its military failure in Iraq and the impossibility of attacking Iran, this group changed its strategy. It adopted the British project of overthrowing the secular régimes of the Greater Middle East and remodeling the region into small states administered by the Muslim Brotherhood. Progressively, it took control of NATO, the European Union and the UNO. It was only several millions of deaths and trillions of dollars later that it was challenged in the United States by the election of Donald Trump, and in France by François Fillon.

US SUPREMACY

When the Second World War ended, the United States was the only victorious nation that had not experienced war on its own soil. Profiting from its advantage, Washington chose to succeed London in the control of its Empire, and to enter into conflict with Moscow. Over the next 44 years, a Cold War followed the real war. When the Soviet Union began to fall apart, President George H. Bush Sr. decided that it was time to do business. He began to scale down his armies, and ordered a revision of foreign policy and military doctrine.

Washington then claimed, in its publication « National Security Strategy of the United States », (1991) that « The United States remains the only state with genuinely global strength, range and influence in all dimensions – political, economic and military. There is no substitute for American leadership ».

This is why they reorganised the world during operation « Desert Storm » – they pressured their Kuwaiti ally to steal Iraqi oil, and at the same time, to demand arrears on the reimbursement of Iraq’s allegedly free aid against Iran. Next they encouraged their Iraqi ally to resolve the problem by annexing Kuwait, which had been arbitrarily carved out by the British 30 years earlier. Finally, they invited every state on the planet to support them – instead of the United Nations – in the reaffirmation of international law.

But since the two empires were propped up one against the other, the disappearance of the USSR ought logically to have brought about the fall of the other super-power, the United States. In order to prevent its collapse, the US parliamentarians forced President Bill Clinton to rearm in 1995. The armed forces, which had just demobilized a million men, began to rearm, although at that time they had no enemy who could equal them. The dream of Bush Sr. of a unipolar world led by United States business gave way to an insane chase to hold onto the imperial project.

Since the dissolution of the USSR, US domination of the world has been imposed through four wars which were waged without the approval of the United Nations – in Yugoslavia (1995 and 1999), in Afghanistan (2002), in Iraq (2003) and in Libya (2011). This period came to an end with the ten Chinese and 16 Russian vetos at the UN Security Council, which explicitly forbade open conflict with Syria.

The Gulf War had hardly ended when Republican George H. Bush Sr. asked his defence secretary, Dick Cheney who relayed the orer to Paul Wolfowitz, to write the Defense Policy Guidance (this was a classified document, but extracts were published by the New York Times and the Washington Post). This militant Trotskyist and future Assistant Secretary for Defense, presented therin his theory concerning US supremacy.

« Our first objective », he wrote, « is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, whether on the territory of the former Soviet Union or anywhere, that could pose a threat similar to that formerly posed by the Soviet Union. This is the predominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy, and requires that we endeavour to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power. These regions include Europe, the Far East, the territories of the ex-Soviet Union, and South-East Asia ».

There are three additional aspects to this objective:

 « Firstly, the U.S. must show the leadership necessary for establishing and protecting a new world order capable of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests.

 Secondly, in non-defense areas, we must represent the interests of the advanced industrial nations efficiently enough to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order.

 Finally, we must maintain the mechanism for deterring potential competitors from aspiring to a larger regional or global role ».

The « Wolfowitz Doctrine » was supposed to prevent a new Cold War and guarantee the United States its place as the « world policeman ». President Bush Sr. massively demobilised his armies, because they were no longer to be anything more than a police force.

And yet what we saw was the opposite of that – first of all with the four wars mentioned above, as well as the war against Syria, then the war in Ukraine against Russia.
 It was in order to demonstrate the « necessary leadership » that Washington decided, in 2001, to take control of all the hydrocarbon reserves in the « Greater Middle East » – a decision that launched the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
 It was in order to « dissuade [their allies] from challenging [their] leadership », that it modified its plan in 2004 and decided to apply the British suggestions (1) to annex the non-recognised Russian states – starting with South Ossetia – and (2) to overthrow the secular Arab governments for the benefit of the Muslim Brotherhood – the « Arab Springs ».
 Finally, it is in order to dissuade Russia from playing « a global role » that it is currently using the jihadists and ex-jihadists in Syria, in the Ukraine and in the Crimea.

To be implemented, the Wolfowitz Doctrine thus required not only financial and human means, but also a powerful a powerful hegemonic will. A group of political and military officials hoped to find their man by promoting the candidacy of the son of George Bush Sr. – George Bush Jr. This group asked the Kagan family to create a lobbying group within the American Enterprise Institute – the Project for a New American Century. They were obliged to falsify the Presidential election in Florida – with the help of Governor Jeb Bush, Jr.’s brother – in order to allow W to clamber into the White House. But well before that, the group was actively militant for the preparation of new wars of invasion, particularly in Iraq.

But the new President was not particularly obedient, which forced his supporters to organise a shock for public opinion, which they compared to a « New Pearl Harbor », on September 11, 2001.

THE CRASH OF SEPTEMBER 11

Everyone thinks that they know about 9/11, and can quote from memory about the planes that hit the Twin Towers and the destruction of part of the Pentagon. But behind these events and their interpretation by the Bush administration, something quite different happened.

When two planes smashed into the World Trade Center, when the offices of the Vice-President were devastated by flames, and explosions were heard in the Pentagon, the National Coordinator for Counterterrorism, Richard Clarke, launched the procedure for « Continuity of Government » (CoG). Developed during the Cold War, in case of a nuclear confrontation and the decapitation of the centres of Executive and Legislative Power, this procedure was devised to save the country by handing over all responsibility to a provisional authority which had been secretly designated beforehand.

But on that day, none of the elected leaders died.

Nevertheless, by 10 a.m., George W. Bush was no longer President of the United States of America. The Executive Power was transferred from the White House in Washington to site « R », the Raven Rock Mountain bunker. Units of the army and the Secret Services circulated in the capital, to collect and « protect » the members of Congress and their teams. Almost all of them were taken, « for their safety », to another mega-bunker close to the capital, the Greenbrier Complex.

The alternative government, whose composition had not changed for at least nine years, included – as if by a miraculous coincidence – several personalities who had been in politics for a long time, including Vice-President Dick Cheney, Secretary for Defense Donald Rumsfeld and ex-Director of the CIA, James Woolsey.

During the afternoon, Israëli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon interfered in the crisis and addressed the citizens of the United States, while no-one knew anything about the implementation of the Continuity of Government plan, and there was no news of George W. Bush. He declared the solidarity of his people, who had also been long a victim of terrorism. He spoke as if he was convinced that the attacks were over, but without indicating his sources, and as if he represented the American state.

Finally, at the end of the afternoon, the provisional government handed back executive power to President Bush, who made a televised speech, and the Congressional representatives were freed.

These are proven facts, and not the outlandish tales that the Bush administration concocted, with kamikaze warriors hatching a plot in an Afghani cave to destroy the greatest military power in the world.

In a book published thirty years earlier, destined to become the Republicans’ bedside book during the electoral campaign of 2000, Coup d’état – A Practical Handbook, historian Edward Luttwak explained that a coup d’état is all the more effective when no-one realizes that it has happened, and therefore do not oppose it. He should also have added that in order for the legal government to obey the conspirators, it is necessary not only to maintain the illusion that the same team is in « Power », but for the conspirators to be part of it.

The decisions imposed by the provisional government on September 11 were approved by President Bush during the days that followed. Concerning the interior, the Bill of Rights – the first ten amendments of the Constitution – was suspended by the USA Patriot Act for all affairs of terrorism. Concerning exterior affairs, régime changes and wars were planned, both to hinder the development of China and to destroy all the state structures of the Greater Middle East.

President Bush held the Islamists responsible for the attacks of 9/11, and declared the « War on Terrorism » – an expression which sounds macho enough, but is nonetheless nonsensical. Indeed, terrorism is not a world power, but a method of action. Within a few years, the terrorism that Washington claimed to be fighting had increased 20-fold throughout the world. George W. Bush qualified this new conflict as an « Endless War ».

Four days later, President Bush presided an implausible meeting at Camp David, during which the principle was adopted for a long series of wars aimed at destroying all the as yet uncontrolled states in the « Greater Middle East », as well as a plan for political assassinations throughout the world. This project was named by the Director of the CIA, George Tenet – he called it the « Worldwide Attack Matrix ». This meeting was first mentioned by the Washington Post, then denied by the ex-Supreme Commander of NATO, General Wesley Clark. By « Matrix », it is important to understand that this was only the initial phase of a much more far-reaching strategy

WHO GOVERNS THE UNITED STATES?

In order to understand the institutional crisis which was brewing, we have to take a step back.

The founding myth of the United States claims that a few Puritans, convinced of the impossibility of reforming the British Church and monarchy, decided to build a « New Jerusalem » in the Americas. In 1620, they sailed to the New World on board the Mayflower, where they gave thanks to God for having allowed them to cross the Red Sea (in fact, the Atlantic Ocean) and to escape the dictatorship of Pharaoh (the King of England). This is the origin of the feast of Thanksgiving.

The Puritans claimed to obey God by respecting both the teaching of Christ and the Jewish Law. They did not venerate the Gospels in particular, but the whole of the Bible. For them, the Old Testament was as important as the New. They practised an austere form of morality – they were persuaded that they had been chosen by God, and thus blessed by Him by means of their wealth. Consequently, they considered that no man can improve himself, whatever he does, and that Money is a gift reserved by God for His faithful.

This ideology has many consequences. For example, their refusal to organise a form of national solidarity (Social Security), replacing it with individual charity. Or again, in penal matters, by the belief that some people are born criminals, which led the Manhattan Institute to promote, laws which in many states punished repeat offenders with very heavy prison terms, even for minor infractions, like not having paid for a subway ticket.

Even though the national myth has by now mostly buried the fanaticism of the « Pilgrim Fathers », the truth remains that they set up a sectarian community, established corporal punishment, and obliged their women to wear veils. In fact, there are clearly many similarities between their way of life and that of contemporary Islamists.

The War of Independence unfolded at a time when the populations of the colonies had been profoundly modified. They no longer came exclusively from the British Isles, but now included Europeans from all over. The patriots who fought the King of England hoped to become masters of their own destiny, and create institutions which were both Republican and Democratic. It was for them that Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence in 1776, inspired by the Lumières movement in general and the philosopher John Locke in particular. However, after victory was won, it was a very different source which inspired the Constitution. This was founded on the Mayflower Pact, that is to say the Puritan ideology, and the wish to create institutions comparable to those of Great Britain, but without the element of hereditary nobility. This is why, rejecting popular sovereignty, it instituted the sovereignty of the governors of federal states. As such a system is absolutely unacceptable, it was immediately « balanced » by 10 constitutional amendments which form the Bill of Rights. The final text therefore reserves political responsibility for the elites of the federal states and gives citizens the right to defend themselves in court against the « Reason of State ».

By suspending the Bill of Rights in all affairs which may be connected to terrorism, the USA Patriot Act has dragged the Constitution two centuries in reverse. By depriving citizens of their legal rights, it has once again destabilized institutions. It has submitted Power to Puritan ideology and guaranteed only the rights of the elites of federal states.

The coup d’état of September 11 split these elites into two groups, depending on whether they supported it or pretended to ignore it. The few personalities opposed to it, like Senator Paul Wellstone, have been physically eliminated. A few citizens chose to speak out nonetheless, notably two real estate billionaires. Thus, on the evening of September 11, Donald Trump contested what was becoming the official version on Channel 9 in New York. After having reminded his listeners that the engineers who built the Twin Towers had since joined his company, he considered it impossible that the collapse of such massive towers was due to the impact of planes (and fires) alone. He concluded that there had to be other factors involved which were as yet unknown. Another entrepreneur, Jimmy Walter, spent his fortune buying pages of publicity in the newspapers and distributing DVD’s to analyze the true causes of these destructions.

Over the next fifteen years, these two groups – the conspirators and the passive accomplices – although they were pursuing the same objective of interior and exterior domination – were to confront one another regularly, until both were apparently overthrown by a popular movement led by Donald Trump.

We are continuing the publication of Thierry Meyssan’s book, Under our eyes . In this episode, he exposes the transformations of the American Empire thanks to 9/11: the creation of a system of internal surveillance of the civilian population and, outside, the launch of endless war in the Middle East. expanded. He also returns to the posthumous influence of the philosopher Leo Strauss on the lifting of scruples that US and Israeli leaders might have had to implement such a program.

WASHINGTON’S STRATEGY

Back to our narration. In 2001, Washington had finally become intoxicated and persuaded itself of an imminent shortage of energy sources. The Working Group, chaired by Dick Cheney, on the Development of National Energy Policy (NEPD) had heard from all the private and public officials responsible for the supply of hydrocarbons. Having met at the time the secretary general of this organization, which the Washington Post described as a “secret society”, I was impressed by his determination and by his plans to deal with the shortage. So that, knowing nothing about this question, I adhered for a moment to this Malthusian vision.

Either way, Washington concludes that it needed to seize known oil and gas reserves as quickly as possible to keep its economy functioning. This policy will be abandoned when the US elite see the possibility of exploiting other forms of oil than Saudi crude oil , Texan oil or that of the North Sea. By taking control of Pemex, the United States will seize the reserves of the Gulf of Mexico and proclaim its energy independence by masking its package behind the promotion of oil and shale gas. Today, contradicting Dick Cheney’s predictions, the supply of oil has never been greater and remains cheap.

To control the “Wider Middle East”, the Pentagon demands full latitude and distinguishes its strategic objective from the wishes of the oil companies. Drawing on British and Israeli work, he plans to reshape the region, that is to say to upset the borders inherited from European Empires, to suppress the large states capable of resisting him and to create small ethnically homogeneous states. . Besides being a project of domination, this plan deals with the whole region without taking into account local specificities. If the populations are sometimes geographically distinct, they are also totally overlapping, making their separation illusory unless they lead to vast massacres.

In fact, the team that organized the 9/11 attacks — of which Dick Cheney was a part — knew all of this and thought about it long before. So it applies a vast reform of the armies according to the model of Admiral Arthur Cebrowski. This man has already transformed US military practices based on new computer tools. He also developed a strategy to destroy the states as political organizations and allow large IT companies lead the world globalized in their place. The very day after 9/11, the Army magazine, Parameters, exposes the project of remodeling of the “Wider Middle East” while specifying that it will be particularly bloody and cruel. It indicates that it will be necessary to carry out crimes against humanity which could be subcontracted to third parties. Then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld gives Admiral Cebrowski an office in the Pentagon to oversee it all.

September 11 is therefore not only a means of urgently passing an anti-terrorism code, the USA Patriot Act , drafted at least two years in advance, but also of undertaking a vast reform of institutions: the creation of the Secretariat for the Defense of the Fatherland (Department of Homeland Security, often incorrectly translated as Department of Homeland Security) and that of the underground Special Forces (within the armed forces).

The Homeland Security Department does not only oversee various agencies such as the Coast Guard or immigration services. It is also a vast system of control of the American population, employing 112,000 full-time domestic spies. The Clandestine Special Forces are an army of 60,000 highly trained men, acting without uniform in defiance of the Geneva Conventions. They can assassinate whoever the Pentagon wants, anywhere in the world. And the Pentagon is not going to deprive itself of making a return on this investment in the greatest secrecy.

THE WARS
AGAINST AFGHANISTAN AND AGAINST IRAQ

Operations begin with the war against the Taliban, in application of the Cheney doctrine after the breakdown of negotiations to build a pipeline through Afghanistan in mid-July 2001. Ambassador Niaz Naik, who represented Pakistan at the negotiations from Berlin with the Taliban, had returned to Islamabad considering the US attack inevitable. His country had started to prepare for its consequences. The British fleet had deployed in the Arabian Sea, NATO had sent 40,000 men to Egypt, and the Tajik leader Ahmed Shah Massoud had been assassinated two days before the attacks in New York and Washington.

Representatives of the United States and United Kingdom at the UN, John Negroponte and Sir Jeremy Greenstock, assure that President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair apply the right to self-defense by attacking Afghanistan. However, all the chancelleries know that Washington and London wanted to wage this war independently of the attacks. At best, they conclude that they are instrumenting the crime of which only the first was the victim. However, I manage to cast doubt on the world over what really happened on 9/11. In France, President Jacques Chirac has my work evaluated by the DGSE. After a vast investigation, it finds that all the elements on which I am relying are true, but it cannot confirm my conclusions.

The daily Le Monde , which opened a campaign to discredit me, lampooned my expectation that the United States will attack Iraq. Yet the inevitable happens. Washington accuses Baghdad of harboring members of Al Qaeda and of preparing weapons of mass destruction to attack the “land of the free”. So it will be war, as in 1991.

Everyone is then faced with a case of conscience. By continuing to close our eyes to the September 11 coup, we refrain from contesting the discourse of the United States and we find ourselves forced to approve the following crime: the invasion of Iraq as it happens. Only a senior international civil servant, Hans Blix, decides to defend the truth. This Swedish diplomat is the former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). He chairs the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, which oversees Iraq. Standing up to Washington, he asserts that Iraq does not have the means of which it is accused. Unprecedented pressure soon weighs on his shoulders: not only the US Empire, but all its allies are putting pressure on him to stop his childishness and let the first power in the world destroy Iraq. He will not give in, even when his successor at the IAEA, the Egyptian Mohamed el-Baradei, pretends to play the peacemaker.

On February 5, 2003, Secretary of State and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell delivered a speech to the Security Council, the text of which was written by Cheney’s team. He accuses Iraq of all evils, including protecting the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks and preparing weapons of mass destruction to attack Western states. In passing, he reveals the existence of a new face of Al-Qaeda, Abu Moussab Al-Zarqaoui.

But, in turn, Jacques Chirac refuses to join in the crime. However, he does not imagine himself denouncing Washington’s lies. He sends his Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dominique de Villepin, to the Security Council. He left the DGSE reports in Paris and focused his intervention on the difference between an imposed war and a chosen war. It is clear that the attack on Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11, but is an imperial choice, a conquest. Villepin will then underline the results already obtained by Blix in Iraq. Then he will deflate the US accusations to show that the use of force is not justified at this stage and conclude that nothing proves that the war can obtain better results than the continuation of the inspections. Believing that this intervention will offer a way out for Washington and that war will be avoided, the Security Council applauds it. It is the first time that diplomats have applauded one of their own in this room.

Not only Washington and London will impose their war, but forgetting Hans Blix, the United States will undertake all kinds of operations to “make Chirac pay”. The French President will not be long in letting his guard down and serving his American overlord more than necessary.

We must learn the lessons of this crisis. Hans Blix, like his compatriot Raoul Wallenberg during World War II, rejected the idea that Americans (or Germans) were superior to others. He decided to try to save men who had committed no other crimes than being Iraqis (or Hungarian Jews). Jacques Chirac would have liked to be like them, but his previous mistakes and the secrets of his private life exposed him to blackmail which left him only the choice to resign or submit.

Washington plans to place in power in Baghdad Iraqis in exile that it has selected from a British association, the Iraqi National Council, chaired by Ahmed Chalabi. Whether he is also considered an international crook after his conviction in the bankruptcy of Bank Petra of Jordan is not taken into account. Aircraft maker Lockheed Martin created a Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, of which former Secretary of State and Bush Jr. mentor George Shultz took the presidency. This Committee and the Chalabi Council are selling this war to American public opinion. They assure that the United States will confine itself to providing assistance to the Iraqi opposition and that it will not be long.

Like the attack on Afghanistan, the attack on Iraq was prepared before the attacks in New York and Washington. Vice-President Dick Cheney himself negotiated in early 2001 the establishment of US military bases in Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan as part of the development of the Central Asia Battalion (CENTRASBAT) agreements of the Central Asian Economic Community. . As planners anticipated that to wage this war the troops would require 60,000 tonnes of material per day, the Military Traffic Management Command (MTMC) was tasked with starting in advance to transport logistics there. .

The training of the troops did not take place until after the attacks. These were the most important military maneuvers in history: “ Millennium Challenge 2002” . This war game mixed real maneuvers and staff room simulations carried out using the technological tools used in Hollywood for the film Gladiator. From July 24 to August 15, 2002, 13,500 men were mobilized. The islands of San Nicola and San Clemente, off California, and the Nevada desert had been evacuated to serve as a theater of operations. This debauchery of resources required a budget of 235 million dollars. For the record, the soldiers simulating the Iraqi troops were commanded by General Paul Van Riper; implementing an unconventional strategy, they prevailed handily on US troops so that the staff stopped the exercise before the end.

Taking into account neither Hans Blix’s reports nor French objections, Washington launched “ Operation Iraqi Liberation” on March 19, 2003. Given the meaning of its English acronym, OIL ( oil), it is renamed “Operation Iraqi Freedom” ( Operation Iraqi Freedom ). A fire of unparalleled power descends on Baghdad, causing “shock and amazement” ( Shock and Awe ). The Baghdadis are dazed as the United States and its allies seize the country.

The government is first assumed by an office of the Pentagon, the ORHA ( Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance ), then after a month by a civilian administrator appointed by the Secretary of Defense, L. Paul Bremer III, Henry Kissinger’s private assistant. He soon took the title of administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority. However, contrary to what this name suggests, this Authority was not created by the Coalition which never met and whose exact composition is unknown.

For the first time, an organ appears that depends on the Pentagon, but does not appear on any organizational chart of the United States. It is the offshoot of the group that seized power on September 11, 2001. In documents released by Washington, the Authority is referred to as an organ of the Coalition if the document is intended for foreigners, and as an organ of government. US if it is destined for Congress. With the exception of one UK official, all Authority employees are paid by US administrations, but are not subject to US law. They are also comfortable with the Code des Marches Publics. The Authority seizes the Iraqi Treasury, that is to say 5 billion dollars, but only one billion appears in its accounts. What happened to the remaining 4 billion? The question is asked at the Madrid conference for reconstruction. She will never receive a response.

Paul Bremer’s deputy is none other than Sir Jeremy Greenstock, the UK representative on the Security Council who justified the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq. During the occupation, the United States is examining the possibilities of remodeling Iraq, in this case the partition into three states, according to the plan of Democratic Senator Joe Biden. Bremer therefore sends Ambassador Peter Galbraith – who organized the partition of Yugoslavia into seven separate states – as adviser to the Kurdish regional government.

Bremer works directly with Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, who set the future US strategy during the dissolution of the USSR. He is a Trotskyist Jew who was trained in the thought of Leo Strauss. He installed many followers of the German philosopher in the Pentagon. Together they form a structured, very coherent and united group. According to them, learning from the weakness of the Weimar Republic in the face of the Nazis, Jews cannot trust democracies to protect them against a new genocide. On the contrary, they must take the side of authoritarian regimes and stand on the side of power. Thus, the idea of ​​a world dictatorship is legitimized in a preventive manner.

Wolfowitz sets out the main lines of the work of the Coalition Provisional Authority, namely the de-Baathification of the country – that is, the dismissal of all civil servants who are members of the secular Baath Party – and its economic plunder. On his instructions, Bremer awards all public contracts to friendly companies, usually without tendering; which excludes in principle the French and the Germans guilty of having opposed this imperial war.

All of the members of the Project for a New American Century , the think tank that prepared 9/11, are incorporated, directly or indirectly, into or work with the Coalition Provisional Authority.

From the start, these people raised a strong reluctance. First that of the representative of the UN Secretary General, the Brazilian Sérgio Vieira de Mello. He was assassinated on August 19, 2003, allegedly by the jihadist Abu Moussab Al-Zarqaoui whom Powell had denounced to the UN. On the contrary, those close to the diplomat underline the conflict between him and Wolfowitz and directly accuse a US faction. Then, it was General James Mattis, commander of the 1st Marine Division, who worried about the disastrous consequences of de-Baasification. He will eventually fall into line.

Carried away by their successes in the United States, Afghanistan and Iraq, the men of September 11 are orienting their country towards new targets.

THEOPOLITICS

From October 12 to 14, 2003, a strange meeting takes place at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. According to the invitation card: “Israel is the moral alternative to Eastern totalitarianism and Western moral relativism. Israel is the “Ground Zero” of our civilization’s central battle for its survival. Israel can be saved, and the rest of the West with it. It is time to unite in Jerusalem. “

Several hundred personalities of the Israeli and American extreme rights are received at the expense of the Russian mafia. Avigdor Lieberman, Benyamin Netanyahu and Ehud Olmert congratulate Elliot Abrams, Richard Perle and Daniel Pipes.

All share the same belief: the theopolic. According to them, the “end of times” is near. Soon the world will be ruled by a Jewish institution based in Jerusalem.

This meeting worries progressive Israelis, especially as some speakers refer to Baghdad, which was conquered six months earlier, as the ancient “Babylon”. It is obvious to them that the theopolitics on which this congress is claimed is a resurgence of Talmudism. This current of thought – of which Leo Strauss was a specialist – interprets Judaism as a thousand-year-old prayer of the Jewish people to avenge the crimes of the Egyptians against their ancestors, their deportation to Babylon by the Assyrians and even the destruction of the Jews of Europe by the Nazis. He considers that the “Wolfowitz doctrine” prepares the Armageddon (the final battle) that will be the establishment of chaos first in the wider Middle East, then in Europe. A general destruction which will mark the divine punishment of those who made the Jewish people suffer.

Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak realizes the mistake he made in refusing the peace he himself negotiated with Presidents Bill Clinton and Hafez al-Assad; a peace which would have preserved the interests of all the populations of the region and which the theopoliticians did not want. He begins to gather the officers who will try in vain to prevent the re-election of Benyamin Netanyahu, in November 2014, within Commanders for Israel Security (The senior officers for the security of Israel). He will continue his fight until delivering his speech in June 2016, at the Herzliya conference, in which he will denounce Netanyahu’s worst-case policy and his desire to institutionalize Apartheid. He will call on his compatriots to save their country by blocking these fanatics.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s