by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
March 18, 2010
from
GlobalResearch Website
|
Dr. Roberts was Assistant
Secretary U.S. Treasury, Associate Editor Wall Street Journal,
Columnist for Business Week, Senior Research Fellow Hoover
Institution Stanford University, and William E. Simon Chair of
Political Economy in the Center for Strategic and International
Studies, Washington, D.C. |
According to news reports, the U.S. military is shipping “bunker-buster”
bombs to the U.S. Air Force base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The
Herald Scotland reports that experts say the bombs are being assembled for
an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
The newspaper quotes Dan Piesch,
director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at the
University of London:
“They are gearing up totally for the destruction of
Iran.”
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/world-news/final-destination-iran-1.1013151
The next step will be a staged “terrorist attack,” a “false flag” operation
as per
Operation Northwoods, for which Iran will be blamed.
As Iran and its
leadership have already been demonized, the “false flag” attack will suffice
to obtain US and European public support for bombing Iran.
The bombing will
include more than the nuclear facilities and will continue until the
Iranians agree to regime change and the installation of a puppet government.
The corrupt American media will present the new puppet as “freedom and
democracy.”
If the past is a guide, Americans will fall for the deception. In the
February issue of the American Behavioral Scientist, a scholarly journal,
Professor Lance DeHaven-Smith writes that state crimes against democracy (SCAD)
involve government officials, often in combination with private interests,
that engage in covert activities in order to implement an agenda.
Examples
include:
-
McCarthyism or the fabrication of evidence of communist
infiltration
-
the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution based on false claims of
President Johnson and Pentagon chief McNamara that North Vietnam attacked a
U.S. naval vessel
-
the burglary of the office of Daniel Ellsberg’s
psychiatrist in order to discredit Ellsberg (the Pentagon Papers) as
“disturbed”
-
the falsified “intelligence” that Iraq possessed weapons of
mass destruction in order to justify the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
http://www.mediafreedominternational.org/2010/03/02/state-crimes-against-democracy/
There are many other examples.
I have always regarded the 1995 bombing of
the Murrah Federal Office Building in Oklahoma City as a SCAD. Allegedly, a
disturbed Tim McVeigh used a fertilizer bomb in a truck parked outside the
building. More likely, McVeigh was a patsy, whose fertilizer bomb was a
cover for explosives planted inside the building.
A number of experts dismissed the possibility of McVeigh’s bomb producing
such structural damage.
For example, General Benton K. Partin, who was in
charge of U.S. Air Force munitions design and testing, produced a thick
report on the Murrah building bombing which concluded that the building blew
up from the inside out.
Gen. Partin concluded that,
“the pattern of damage
would have been technically impossible without supplementary demolition
charges at some of the reinforced concrete bases inside the building, a
standard demolition technique. For a simplistic blast truck bomb, of the
size and composition reported, to be able to reach out on the order of 60
feet and collapse a reinforced column base the size of column A7 is beyond
credulity.”
Gen. Partin dismissed the official report as “a massive cover-up of immense
proportions.”
Fake Terror at The Murrah Building Bombing - The
Opinions of General Partin and Other Bomb Experts
Of course, the general’s unquestionable expertise had no bearing on the
outcome.
One reason is that his and other expert voices were drowned out by media
pumping the official story. Another reason is that public beliefs in a
democracy run counter to suspicion of government as a terrorist agent.
Professor Laurie Manwell of the University of Guelph says that “false flag”
operations have the advantage over truth: “research shows that people are
far less willing to examine information that disputes, rather than confirms,
their beliefs.”
Professor Steven Hoffman agrees:
“Our data shows substantial
support for a cognitive theory known as ‘motivated reasoning,’ which
suggests that rather than search rationally for information that either
confirms or disconfirms a particular belief, people actually seek out
information that confirms what they already believe. In fact, for the most
part people completely ignore contrary information.”
Even when hard evidence
turns up, it can be discredited as a “conspiracy theory.”
All that is necessary for success of “false flag” or “black ops” events is
for the government to have its story ready and to have a reliable and
compliant media. Once an official story is in place, thought and
investigation are precluded. Any formal inquiry that is convened serves to
buttress the already provided explanation.
An explanation ready-at-hand is almost a give-away that an incident is a
“black ops” event.
Notice how quickly the U.S. government, allegedly so
totally deceived by al Qaida, provided the
explanation for 9/11. When
President Kennedy was assassinated, the government produced the culprit
immediately. The alleged culprit was conveniently shot inside a jail by a
civilian before he could be questioned. But the official story was ready,
and it held.
Professors Manwell and Hoffman’s research resonates with me.
I remember
reading in my graduate studies that the Czarist secret police set off bombs
in order to create excuses to arrest their targets. My inclination was to
dismiss the accounts as anti-Czarist propaganda by pro-communist historians.
It was only later when Robert Conquest confirmed to me that this was indeed
the practice of the Czarist secret police that the scales fell from my eyes.
Former CIA official Philip Giraldi in his article, “The Rogue Nation," makes it clear that the U.S. government has a hegemonic agenda that it is
pursuing without congressional or public awareness. The agenda unfolds
piecemeal as a response to “terrorism,” and the big picture is not
understood by the public or by most in Congress.
Giraldi protests that the
agenda is illegal under both U.S. and international law, but that the
illegality of the agenda does not serve as a barrier. Only a naif could
believe that such a government would not employ “false flag” operations that
advance the agenda.
The U.S. population, it seems, is comprised of naifs whose lack of
comprehension is bringing ruin to other lands.