Cry for War

[p. 7]

Who are the no. 1 War Criminals?

[p. 8]

The Invisible Government

The early sixties were tumultuous years for the usa. First jfk and the cia directed mercenaries to invade Cuba. When it failed jfk sought cooperation from the Mafia to have Fidel Castro removed from the scene. The summit with Nikita Khrushchev in Vienna was a flop. The Kremlin promptly erected the Berlin wall. Next followed the Cuban missile crisis, with an eyeball to eyeball confrontation between the Kremlin and the White House. The Soviets withdrew the missiles, but Kennedy by mutual agreement promised never to attack Cuba again. However the us has continued ever since to strangle this small island 150 miles from the coast of Florida by an inhuman, totally illegal economic blockade, which to begin with flies into the face of the most elementary principles of basic human rights. Then in the early sixties serious thought was given in Washington to start an all out ground war in Vietnam to prevent Ho Chi-minh from taking the South. All these dramatic events reached a climax with the assassination of the President himself on November 22, 1963. jfk was nevertheless seen by most people as a hero. Nobody however knew at the time of the many shady deals and outright criminal decisions, he and his White House team had taken, during close to three years in power.

It was for instance to remain unknown to the public, that the President had used a mistress on a mission to the Chicago underworld to arrange for the Cuban leader's early death. By today's standards this one planned murder of a foreign head of state would have landed John Kennedy in the dock together with Slobodan Milosevic at the War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague. That is to say if the same standards were observed for us and Yugoslav leaders.

Since the Declaration of Independence America presented it-

[p. 9]

self as the most freeloving and democratic of nations symbolized by the statue of the famous lady at the entrance to Manhattan. Today at the start of the 21st century the United States of America has become the sole Rogue Super Power in the world. How did this come about? Until World War II Washington remained largely focussed on itself. There were occasional forays into problem areas south of the Rio Grande. There was the rescue mission in World War I to assist Europe remaining free from German domination. Traditionally Congress avoided to play a prominent role onto the world stage. In 1941, for instance, the us was still represented in Jakarta, Indonesia by merely a consul-general to assist possible American tourists. In 1958 Dwight D. Eisenhower launched an amateurish cia coup in this fourth largest country in the world, to topple Sukarno. Why?

Because the Indonesian President was considered by the Washington regime of the day too leftist for his own good. Therefore America took it upon herself to remove him. Indonesians, however looked upon Sukarno as the father of the nation, since he had begun in his student days during the twenties the long march to freedom from several centuries of Dutch colonialism. Eisenhower was not successful. Some traitors could indeed be found and bribed to set up a rival government on the island of Sumatra, financed and armed by the cia, but the Indonesian Army remained loyal to Sukarno. The us intervention ended in failure. Seven years later, a second cia try would bring Sukarno down indeed. The us had by then learned to behave as a full fledged Rogue Power, fighting wars, overthrowing legal governments Washington did not like, assassinating foreign leaders, invading sovereign states by open or covert warfare, as if there were no international treaties or legal conventions to abide by, as if the Charter of the United Nations was never signed by Harry S. Truman on behalf of all Americans.

[p. 10]

The accidental transformation from minor power to number one in the world ready to intervene anywhere at any time evolved as the direct outcome of World War II. When Hitler overran Europe, a massive flight of brains and capital from the old to the new world occurred. In order to make an allied victory over the Axis powers possible the us was forced to replace German I.G. Farben and Krupp with a war industry of its own. This was one reason for the rise to power of the notorious military-industrial complex. The other, of course, was the start of the Cold War. These developments laid a vital cornerstone fore what was to become The Invisible Government.

In 1964, a year after Dallas, David Wise (The New York Herald Tribune) and Thomas Ross (The Chicago Tribune) co-authored The Invisible Government¹. After following a course in Diplomacy at ‘Nijenrode Castle’ in the Netherlands (1946-1948), I joined classes in International Relations at Yale College (1948-1950). Professor Arnold Wolfers was Dean of the Department and Master of Pierson College, where I lived. The cia had been established in 1947 to protect humanity from Communism, at least that interpretation was given by the spooks to the international us spy network. At Yale little attention was given to what seemed a perfectly normal and routine affair. Most specialists like Wolfers never expected the cia to grow into an intelligence behemoth that was to become uncontrollable for either the Congress or the White House.

Prior to leaving the presidency in late 1960, general Eisenhower voiced a solemn warning. He went on record fearing that the military industrial complex was becoming a state within the state. Ike's alarm bell was duly registered by some, but most people went on with their business unaware of the urgency of the matter. The general knew his Administration was preparing a cia invasion of neighbouring Cuba. He also knew, perhaps having learned from the 1958 cia debacle in Indonesia, that attacking Fidel Castro without a United Nations Security

1 David Wise, Thomas Ross, The Invisible Government, Random House, New York.

[p. 11]

Council mandate amounted to violating the Charter of the United Nations. Somehow, he failed to make this clear to his successor, who scored his first cataclysm on the beaches of the Bay of Pigs. jfk never wholly recovered from that cia calamity. Castro made him look like a fool. jfk followed up by doubling his efforts to get the Cuban leader killed.

Investigative reporters Wise and Ross must have picked up Ike's warning, because their 1964 book fitted his alarming message like a glove. ‘There are two governments in the United States today,’ said the first line in their book. ‘One is visible. The other is invisible.’ The second paragraph dealt with the fact that the first Administration is the one reported in the media and on television. The second is ‘the interlocking, hidden machinery that carries out the policies of the United States in the Cold War.’ The writers explained that one should not think in terms of ‘a formal body’ as a second functioning government. They described the invisibles, as ‘a loose, amorphous grouping of individuals and agencies drawn from many parts of the visible government.’ Neither were they referring to the cia exclusively. They described the intelligence community in 1964 consisting off: the National Security Council, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, Army Intelligence, Navy Intelligence, Air Force Intelligence, the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, the Atomic Energy Commission and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Wise and Ross spoke prophetic words when they identified the existence of a shadow government in Washington shaping the lives of some 190 million Americans. In 2001, we know with hindsight how the us invisible government has killed, maimed, bombed, used chemical warfare against peasants in Southeast Asia, mined the waters around Nicaragua to prevent Soviet ships from bringing in aid, led a manhunt in Bolivia to track down Che Guevara like an animal.

[p. 12]

This criminal behaviour sprang from the mad post-war American obsession with Marxism-Leninism. The 1945 Yankee cloak and dagger boys were convinced that anything was permitted in their crusade against Communism. They were the true and self-appointed defenders of the American fatherland and, if need be, humanity on the whole. In Europe, we identify zealots like these as neo-Nazis. No approval of Congress to act in the national interest was needed. To hell with the United Nations, the Geneva Convention on War Crimes, and whatever soft-headed peaceniks were saying. Hence, of course it was quite normal in the minds of the anti-Communist crusaders to send Castro poisoned cigars, or Patrice Lumumba in the Congo poisoned toothpaste, as long as the bastards were going to die. After all, they, the invisibles, knew best what had to be done to make the world safe from the Commies.

The Burmese Secretary General of the United Nations, U Thant, assured me, that the zeal with which Americans were slitting throats in Vietnam reminded him of the Middle Ages. A time, when Christians travelled on horseback to Constantinople to slit the throats of Muslims in the name of Jesus Christ.² Fascism is characterized by centralized power, by controlling all state affairs, including foreign policy, advocating aggressive nationalism, allowing no opposition or criticism, and advocating a strong military industrial complex. In 1922 Mussolini established fascism in Italy, which next spread to Germany. The United States developed after World War II a soft brand of the Mussolini variety. Outwardly it might have looked to the world, that the White House and the President exerted perhaps too much power for their own good, but still it was taken for granted, that the us Congress was up to its task and regularly intervene when lawless vigilante behavior of the intelligence services got out of hand.

In reality, it turned out that time after time the invisibles initiated illegal and murderous actions worldwide without ask-

2 Willem Oltmans, On Growth, The Crisis of Exploding Population and Resource Depletion, Putnam & Sons, New York, 1974, p.p. 1-7.

[p. 13]

ing anybody's permission, including the White House, let alone Congress. The Tonkin Gulf incident during the Vietnam war is a case in point. Virtually everybody produced half truths in their respective memoirs about what had really happened. Most recently, Richard H. Shultz, professor of International Politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, published The Secret War Against Hanoi, Kennedy's and Johnson's use of spies, saboteurs, and covert warriors in North Vietnam³. Shultz relays how on July 30, 1964 us warships shelled Hon Me and Hon Nieu in the north, thus provoking Hanoi to retaliate. They attacked the USS Maddox on August 4, 1964. This incident, provoked by the us side, set the stage - as it was planned by the invisibles all along - for the escalation of the war against Hanoi.

‘However,’ wrote professor Shultz, ‘the incident did not result in the actual decision to escalate. The Johnson Administration had already determined it was necessary. The incident was the vehicle through which the president was able to act on what had already been decided.’ In other words, us intelligence first attacked Hanoi territory to instigate a reaction, which promptly came. Next the Pentagon cried ‘foul’ and had Congress adopt the notorious Tonkin Gulf Resolution opening the gates up to the us Air Force to start bombing the open cities of Hanoi and Haiphong. That was 1964. By the time Bill Clinton launched cruise-missiles into Sudan or Afghanistan, to try diplomacy first was a notion that had long ago disappeared from the brains that were taking decisions at the White House.

Wise and Ross concluded their 1964 remarkably foresighted analysis of what was really happening in America with observations like, ‘The primary concern of the men who drafted the Declaration of Independence was the consent of the governed. By the mid-twentieth century, under the pressures of the Cold War, the primary concern of the nation's leaders had

3 Richard H. Shulz, The Secret War Against Hanoi, Kennedy's and Johnson's use of spies, saboteurs, and covert warriors in North Vietnam, Harper Collins Publishers, New York, 1999.

[p. 14]

become the survival of the governed’. The invisible government emerged as an instrument designed to insure national survival. ‘But because it was hidden, because it operated outside of the normal Constitutional checks and balances, it posed a potential threat to the very system it was designed to protect.’⁴

Former President Harry Truman who in 1947 had signed the National Security Act, which gave birth to the cia, was in 1963 sufficiently alarmed that he sounded a warning, ‘We have grown up as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. There is something about the way the cia has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it.’⁵ Some Kennedy buffs quoted this Truman text pointing to the fact, that he had sounded his warning four weeks after the jfk assassination, which could signal his suspicion, that indeed the Dallas murder had been set up by the intelligence services. The Dallas ambush, they felt, had been carried out with precision and sophistication, and only the brains of kids would accept the official explanation that the President was killed by a lone ex Marine from a window at the Dallas Book Depository. Apart from the fact, that the Zapruder film showed quite clearly that jfk was hit from opposite sides.

I do not think, that anyone expects Bush junior, Cheney or Rumsfeld to come up with a text like Eisenhower's in 1960, warning for the dangers surrouding the military-industrial complex, because the trio themselves are closely linked to the invisibles. Nor does anybody expects a warning anymore, as Truman voiced in 1963. The United States is actually run in 2001 A to Z by an Invisible Government. The democratic election in 2000 became an embarrassing yoke visible to the entire world. But the true significance of that drama will only become clear during the next few decades. The mad scheme

4 David Wise, Thomas Ross, The Invisible Government, Random House, New York, p.p. 348.

5 Washington Post, December 22, 1963.

[p. 15]

about a protective shield against incoming missiles, is already a stark reminder of more nonsense to come. The minds that run the current us Administration were of course programmed in the era of the Cold War. The current president's men are obviously incapable of adapting to new realities as they exist in the 21^st century, which the President demonstrates, especially when left on his own without the benefit of a prompter, he then produces incoherent blabber. Mexican writer, Carlos Fuentes, called Bush II during a recent press conference in Guatemala City, ‘an ignorant lunatic’. Even members of the us cabinet complain publicly, that they are not consulted and don't know what is going on. The younger Bush runs the White House, and thus the United States - and the world - like a Politburo. Quo vadis America?

The Secret State

Former intelligence analyst David F. Rudgers of the Central Intelligence Agency recently published Creating the Secret State⁶. It is quite normal to take half a century before sufficient documents will have become available to begin to get a correct picture of what actually happened. In 1882 the us Navy established the first intelligence unit ever. It was in 1920 followed up with the Military Intelligence Division (mid), writes Rudgers, and operated within the command of the General Staff (G-2). It happened during the deterioration of the international situation in the 30s that ‘the geopolitical thinking of us policy makers’ changed. The Germans were using fifth-columnists as spies. Only in 1939 President Franklin D. Roosevelt at last sent a few important ministers a confidential directive, that espionage, sabotage and counter-intelligence matters needed to be investigated.

6 David F. Rudgers, Creating the Secret State, University Press of Kansas, 2000.

[p. 16]

In those days we see William J. Donovan, who was nicknamed ‘Wild Bill’, when serving in the National Guard along the border with Mexico, emerging as the first American espionage Czar. He led a Law firm in New York, that made him a millionaire. He was also a Republican. Roosevelt, dissatisfied with the reporting of ambassador Joseph Kennedy in London, replaced him with Donovan. Rudgers discovered how Donovan's mind gradually became fascinated with the possibilities of ‘secret warfare’. Wild Bill admired the UK intelligence services and the British aptitude for clandestine operations. He wrote many letters to Roosevelt and members of the cabinet suggesting Washington followed suit. Historian Rudgers describes in minute detail how gradually the unification of various us intelligence organisations led to the foundation of one central spy organisation, the cia. During this process of change, the image of Donovan obtained godlike proportions. Nobody wanted a us Gestapo for countering the Kremlin, wrote Rudgers, but, in fact, that is what the cia eventually turned out to be. When Pinochet in Chili or general Suharto in Indonesia looked for practical ways to put tens of thousands of political prisoners behind bars, they urged Washington for assistance and advice. In Chili as well as in Indonesia us undercover assistence was generously provided to assist in setting up regular concentration camps, in both countries.

March 16, 1945 ambassador Donovan sent President Roosevelt (fdr) a copy of a portion of Great Britain's Official Secrets Act, ‘which imposed harsh penalties on persons seeking or receiving security classified material, suggesting it could serve as a model for action at a later time,’ reported Rudgers.⁷ fdr and Wild Bill became the fathers of the Office of Strategic Services (oss). Obviously President Truman had less patience with the ostentatious Donovan. Rudgers discovered in the Washington files only one meeting of 15 minutes between the two men on May 14, 1945. J. Edgar Hoover of the fbi also belonged to

7 David F. Rudgers, Creating the Secret State, University Press of Kansas, 2000, p.p.30.

[p. 17]

Donovan's enemies. Allen Dulles was running the oss Office in Switzerland at the time and would later become cia director. However, in 1961 he inflicted irrepable damage on jfk with his crazy cia adventure on the beaches of the Bay of Pigs. President Kennedy discharged Allen Dulles six months later.

Harry Truman dissolved the oss on September 20, 1945. After an intermediate period of two years the cia opened for business on September 18, 1947. America had finally legalized its way to fight shadow warfare. The invisible government had become a fact of life and a decisive factor in the Cold War, which was just warming up between the former partners who had, as allies, fought against the Axis powers.

Rudgers reaches at the closure of his research an unusual conclusion. With the defeat of the enemy in 1945 Donovan's oss ceased to have a purpose and was promptly closed down. However, the post war rise of ‘the evil empire’ permitted the uninterrupted existence of the cia till the ussr imploded in 1991 on its own accord. Next, the writer seems to believe, that ‘intelligence, as it has been understood since World War II, is a dying business.’ He added, ‘The cia has entered its second half century of existence striving to avoid the fate of its oss parent.’ I disagree profoundly.

One year after Rudgers wrote these lines, Bush II descending from former cia director Bush I, arrived in the centre of Washington power.

I therefore strongly contend, that while the cia spent the second half of the 20th century containing the Soviet-Union, the state within the state situation will last uninterruptedly until China at last is permanently brought into line by 2050. Of course, it all depends on whether the us by that time has retained its own uncontested status of super power. The way the world is developing in the 21st century makes this expectation far from certain. In other words, in my view, contrary to David Rudgers, the cia has in the foreseeable future still a

[p. 18]

bright fuure and lots of covert operations to carry out, including, military invasions, the usual coup d'états, assassinations, firing of cruise missiles into sovereign states, which misbehaved in the view of Washington. And who knows, perhaps the poisoned cigars, that did not do it for Fidel, might be used on somebody else. The us spy genie is out of the bottle anyway, courtesy Wild Bill Donovan and associates.

I entered journalism in 1953 as foreign editor of the daily, Algemeen Handelsblad in Amsterdam. After two years in the Amsterdam bureau of the United Press I worked in June 1956 as correspondent for De Telegraaf in Rome, Italy, when President Sukarno of Indonesia arrived on a state-visit. I interviewed him and left later that year for Jakarta on assignment for the Nieuwe Rotterdamse Courant and other papers. After covering Indonesia for one year, (1956-1957) I became June 10, 1958, permanent correspondent at United Nations headquarters in New York till the 70s. I lectured from coast to coast on foreign affairs for W. Colston Leigh lecture bureau in New York. It was then that I first looked into us policy vis à vis Southeast Asia. I talked to the Under Secretary for Far Eastern Affairs at the State Department, Walter S. Robertson, who saw me with an aide, Marshall Green, who in 1965 was us ambassador in Jakarta during the second cia coup against Sukarno. Having just spent one year in Indonesia, and having gotten to know Sukarno first hand, I was dumb founded to listen to the incoherent nonsense from two ‘experts’ at the State Department. Robertson and Green should have been fired for incompetence.

Professor George McTurnan Kahin and Audrey R. Kahin published in 1995 Subversion as Foreign Policy, The Secret Eisenhawer and Dulles Debacle in Indonesia.⁸ Only 37 years later Washington released sufficient documents about this first 1958 cia coup in Indonesia that professionals like the Kahin's were able to print a reliable reconstruction of events. They stressed, for

8 George McTurnan Kahin, Audrey R. Kahin, Subversion as Foreign Policy, The Secret Eisenhower and Dulles Debacle in Indonesia, University of Washington Press, 1995.

[p. 19]

instance, that us ambassador John Allison strongly disagreed with opinions in Washington on Sukarno or Indonesia, but he was incapable of making himself heard to the men who had already taken the decision to let the cia overthrow Sukarno. I met Allison. He seemed an extremely unhappy man. Washington left him out in the cold. He was still unaware his superiors were planning to oust Sukarno altogether. When the cia coup took place he resigned as ambassador.

The reason why, at least in the minds of the Washington experts, Sukarno had to go was, that he had become a security risk. He was buying equipment for his armed forces in Moscow. He did so, since Washington had turned him down earlier. Sukarno went in 1956 on his first foreign state-visit since Indonesia became independent from Holland, to the United States. Eisenhower received him correctly but with reserve. He was already listening to guys like Robertson and Green and becoming misinformed. He received an invitation for a return visit to Jakarta, but never bothered to go. Later in 1956 Sukarno went to Moscow and invited the Soviet head-of-state, Marshall Kliment Voroshilov to Indonesia. The Russian came in 1957 and Washington cried foul. Bernard Kalb, New York Times correspondent in Jakarta began writing articles hinting of Sukarno's tilt towards Moscow and Peking. Kalb's reports were nuts, because from my own contacts with Sukarno I knew this to be most definitely untrue. Yet, his articles carried weight in Washington and worked in favour of guys like Robertson and Green. I knew Kalb as a colleague in Jakarta and mistrusted him. When in the eighties he became State Department spokesman for Reagan and Shultz the true man revealed himself at last. A professional journalist can never ever become a slave to His Master's Voice. It is also true, that Kalb later resigned in protest over Shultz' agreement with Reagan over a terrorist attack by us warplanes on Lybia.

‘Apparently even more myopic than Allen Dulles as to the re-

[p. 20]

alities of the Indonesian scene,’ wrote the Kahin's, ‘was the commander in chief of us Pacific Forces (cincpac), Admiral Felix Stump, who clearly at this time inclined toward military intervention.’⁹ Walter Robertson was convinced Indonesia would break up, once a cia coup was underway. He sent an official, Gordon Mein, to Jakarta to assess the situation. He concurred with ambassador Allison and his staff, and reported to Washington quite correctly that a break-up of Indonesia following a cia coup was unlikely. But the warmongers persisted. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Radford even believed that the Indonesian military would work with the us if worst came to the worst and he asked for a prompt survey in order to be ready if fast military action in Indonesia became necessary.

February 10, 1958 colonel Ahmad Hussein signed a proclamation announcing per ultimatum the arrival of the Pemerintah Revolusioner Republik Indonesia (prri) on February 15, 1958. The Kahin's discovered how Eisenhower and the Dulles brothers had become ‘deeply worried’ about growing Communist influence on Java in the summer of 1957. I had joined President Sukarno on a sea voyage to eastern parts of the republic in August. Several ministers, ambassadors and journalists travelled with him. Among them was professor Guy Pauker of the Rand Corporation in California, a thinktank with strong links to the cia. But this connection was unknown at the time. Pauker asked me, ‘since you seem to know the president well, will you introduce me?’ In 1957, I was unfamiliar with cia machinations. So, unsuspecting, I set up a dawn meeting at 06.00 a.m. with the President, when I knew him to be up early for tea and breakfast. I never discovered whether at least Sukarno was aware, that a cia informer travelled in 1957 on the same ship in his presidential party. Pauker must have been one of the sources to the idiots in Washington who suspected Sukarno of turning into a crypto communist.

9 George McTurnan Kahin, Audrey R. Kahin, Subversion as Foreign Policy, The Secret Eisenhower and Dulles Debacle in Indonesia, University of Washington Press, 1995, p.p.86.

[p. 21]

The Kahin researchers further discovered that the Eisenhower Administration enlisted not only the cia and large supplies of modern us military equipment but also substantial components of the us Seventh Fleet and American planes and pilots together with supporting personnel, facilities and supplies from the Chinese on Taiwan and the government of the Philippines. Washington even received modest help from Britain and Australia, classical imperialist minded powers, always ready to fish in troubled Indonesian waters, even in Timor.

In their closing comment, the Kahin's observed, that Eisenhower's attempt to manipulate the politics of Indonesia had been ‘glaringly counterproductive.’ ‘Aimed at changing the character of that country's government to conform to what were perceived to be American interests, it actually strengthened those elements the Administration had sought to eliminate or weaken and destroyed those whom it wished to reinforce.’ This felicitous conclusion by the Kahin's says in a nutshell what has been wrong with us Foreign Policy since World War II. Time after time, Washington decisionmakers deluded themselves by projecting their anti-communist obsessions to foreign lands and their leaders, often contrary to expert advice by American diplomats or observers on the ground. In the case of Sukarno, Roger Hilsman, Director of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and research during the jfk Administration observed in To Move a Nation¹⁰: ‘Before President Sukarno's visit to Washington in 1961, Kennedy remarked in conversation that when you considered things like the cia's support to the 1958 rebellion, Sukarno's frequently anti-American attitude was understandable.’

Between 1956-1966 I observed Sukarno in action in Indonesia itself or abroad, like in 1960 at the United Nations, when he delivered an epochmaking speech, ‘To build the world anew,’ or in Washington, San Francisco, Teheran, Ankara, Copenhagen. Bonn, Venice and many other places. Sukarno was

10 Roger Hillsman, To Move a Nation, Doubleday & Co, New York, 1967 p.p. 363.

[p. 22]

never at any time anti-American as Hilsman suggests. Neither was he anti-Dutch, because the colonialists locked him up for more than eleven years to prevent him from leading the march to freedom for the peoples of the Dutch East Indies. He disliked us Foreign Policy and Dutch colonialism. He was contemptuous of American and Dutch politicians, who called him names and insulted him without having a clue what he really was about. Or, as in the case of Eisenhower and the Dulles brothers, who in 1958 engineered a coup to topple him, at best, he felt contempt for them as misfits produced by a Secret State that should not even be there.

Lumumba

The Belgian Congo became independent on June 30, 1960. Patrice Lumumba (30) was elected the first Prime Minister. He appointed Thomas Kanza, a young man with a Harvard degree, as first Congolese ambassador to the United Nations. Western media were publishing negative reports about the Congolese leader. An exception was Africa specialist Colin Legum, who wrote a foreword to Lumumba's book, Congo, My Country¹¹. The Prime Minister was hacked to death before his book appeared in New York. Legum: ‘It is often wrongly supposed that Lumumba was a half-baked, unsophisticated politician who had only the haziest notion about government and world affairs. This is wide of the mark. His detailed plans for social and political reforms are as valid today as when he first thought them out. Here is a blueprint for those who have survived him to build the structure of a new Congo.’

Belgian writer Ludo de Witte published 38 years after Lumumba was assassinated a Kahin type of documented study about the criminal and brutal behaviour of his enemies, that led to

11 Patrice Lumumba, Congo, My Country, Frederick Praeger, New York, 1962.

[p. 23]

his death and that were totally unworthy of the man.¹² Lumumba's death was perhaps sealed on the day his country gained independence. King Baudouin of Belgium in his speech glorified the founder of the former colony, King Leopold II to such an extend, that Lumumba felt obliged to take the floor and put the record straight without observing the Protocol in honour of His Majesty. The King became very pale. De Witte described how the Congolese leader criticised the colonial system, as humiliating slavery enforced by Belgian arms, while the King had just praised Belgian colonialism to the skies as the masterwork of his Grand Uncle. Lumumba told the truth and the King wanted to return to Brussels at once. He was held back from this decision by the Belgian Prime Minister, but the festivities were spoiled. The Prime Minister of Congo simply aired his deep felt grievances regarding centuries of colonialism, as felt by most Congolese. But he humiliated the Belgians by speaking the truth, just as Fidel Castro would never be forgiven by Washington having liberated Cuba in 1959 from Yankee domination. Lumumba never realized that his outspokenness that fateful day caused the Belgians to brood on revenge. As jfk and Chicago gangsters aimed at bumping off Fidel, circles close to the Belgian King planned to do the same to Patrice Lumumba.

In the mean time pupils of Wild Bill Donovan in Washington played their own dirty games during the transition from Congo colony to independent state. cia boss Allen Dulles had already cabled August 26, 1960 his boy in Leopoldville, Lawrence Devlin, that as long as Lumumba would be in power ‘the best outcome would be chaos or the worst the preparation of a communist take-over.’ Researcher De Witte, who managed to inspect archives in Washington and at the United Nations headquarters, discovered, that the cia had been busy searching for efficient methods to kill Lumumba. He found written proof of Dulles adding in his cable to Devlin: ‘We have de-

12 Ludo de Witte, The Murder of Lumumba, Verso, New York, 2001.

[p. 24]

cided that his elimination has got to be our most important goal and taking present conditions into account this must receive every priority in our secret action.’ De Witte's research was published in Brussels in 1999. His book The Murder of Lumumba led to a parliamentary investigation.

Actually, once more, it was proven who the real war criminals were. Aside from the cia being intensely involved to cutthroat the Prime Minister of Congo, de Witte discovered how King Baudouin and his closest associates, like Foreign Minister Pierre Wigny, count Harold d'Aspremont Lynden of African Affairs, and the grand master of the Court, count Gobert d'Aspremont Lynden had been secretly conspiring to bump off Lumumba. By today's standards both American and Belgian plotters of the murder of a foreign leader should be awaiting trial in the prison of The Hague Tribunal playing chess with Milosevic and other Balkan prisoners.

Already on September 14, 1960, a mere ten weeks after independence, military leader Joseph-Désiré Mobutu, a ‘friend’ of Lumumba, who owed his position to him as well, committed high treason, carried out a coup and kept the legally empowered Prime Minister captive in a villa. His fate had been sealed in Washington and Brussels. Only the scenario as to get rid of the man altogether had not, as yet, been determined. On December 2, 1960, Lumumba came a step closer to his demise, when he was placed under direct command of the military. In practical terms this meant, that the protection given to him in the villa by un blue helmets was taken away. The Prime Minister of the Congo was now in personal danger with the acquiescence of the Secretary-General of the un, Dag Hammerskjöld. He had become an outlaw. January 16, 1961, Minister Harold d'Aspremont Lynden issued an order to hand Lumumba over to his arch-enemy, Moise Tshombe in the province of Katanga. This certified crook was playing ball with the multinational Union Minière, in order to guarantee for-

[p. 25]

eign interests, so that they could continue their colonial exploitation in the now independent Congo without interruption or interference from the Congolese government, provided Tshombe was royally rewarded for his services. Lumumba, a genuine nationalist, would have been an unworkable obstacle to the continued foreign exploitation of Congo's rich natural resources. Therefore, Washington and Brussels simply ordained ‘kill him’.

Ludo de Witte, who's report has appeared on the us market as well, wrote that Belgian Minister Lynden was fully aware, that the Katangese were anxious to slit Lumumba's throat. Albert Kalonji, for instance, announced beforehand, that he intended to use his skull as a vase.

Other local potentates said, that they considered it a privelege that the man could be liquidated on Katanga soil. How to get Lumumba there without too much obstreperousness, was the problem. The cia Manual contained the ideal solution: if someone of importance needed to disappear from the face of the earth arrange ‘a camouflage operation’, meaning, how to kill without all hell breaking loose. January 17, 1961, a Dakota, piloted by the Australian Bob Watson, made a reconnaissance flight to Elisabethville in Katanga to see if it was safe to land there. If there were too many blue helmets of the un in sight, another landingstrip would be used. Soon a dc-4 of Air Congo, a subsidiary company of the Belgian Sabena, arrived piloted by Belgian Piet van der Meersch. He bluntly told the traffic tower, he had come to deliver ‘three packages’. They were, Patrice Lumumba (36), the vice-president of the Congolese Senate, Joseph Okito (50), and the former chief-of-staff of the Army, presently Minister for Sports, Maurice Mpolo (32).

De Witte managed to reconstruct from documentary evidence, how Lumumba had been lured with a trick from Camp Hardy by informing him that there had been another coup in

[p. 26]

Leopoldville, and that he needed to return as fast as possible to the capital. All three members of the Belgian crew of the plane, that flew the Prime Minister to his enemies in Katanga, testified that Lumumba was most severely mistreated during the flight. After his arrival in Katanga he was further outrageously abused and beaten with Belgian officers impassively watching this disgusting scene. Nowadays when Belgian courts are apparently chasing war criminals, like the current Prime Minister of Israël Ariel Sharon, one wonders why Belgian judges don't clean up their own mess first. This is an advice that some governments that shout loudest about others not observing basic human rights should take to heart. In this respect does Washington top the rogue list of murdering and killing at random ever since Wild Bill Donovan learned from the British how to do this effectively and convinced his masters at the White House and in Congress, to copy them.

The first Prime Minister of Congo was butchered to death on January 17, 1961 with former Belgian superiors of the murderers overseeing the bloody affair. For weeks Brussels maintained, that Lumumba had simply been gunned down by villagers while trying escape. At un headquarters in New York Hammerskjöld looked the other way while the blue helmets, who should have protected the Prime Minister of the country stood idly by when the man they had been ordered to protect was shipped as ‘a package’ to the Katanga slaughterhouse. My friend, ambassador Thomas Kanza at the un was extremely worried about the safety of his family. His father was Mayor of Leopoldville and considered Lumumba still the legal leader of the nation. I flew down to the Congo where the Mayor and his family gave a dinner in my honour at their official residence.

The politician Cléophas Kamitatu was also present at the table. He recalled, ‘Patrice once told us, he expected to be killed by the Belgians, or by Congolese bribed by them. Lumumba

[p. 27]

formed Mobutu and made him the officer he became. Now he, too, has been bribed by us ambassador Clare Hayes Timberlake. He ran out of funds to pay the soldiers. I do not feel I am exaggerating when I state here and now that our present misery and tragedy is the sole outcome of Washington mixing in our affairs.’ According to my hosts February 23, 1961 in Leopoldville, it had been Timberlake who convinced Mobutu to desert Lumumba, disband parliament and take matters into his own hands. Kamitatu added, that western media had succeeded in portraying Lumumba and his supporters as crypto-communists. ‘I receive all the time urgent letters from my friends in the us begging me to please not become a communist,’ he said,’ and that truly amuses me.’ Everyone at the Kanza villa that evening agreed, that the real perpetrators of violating Congo's freedom and sovereignty were the Americans, with the Belgians only trailing them as allies of whatever Washington or the cia were deciding in the name of Western interests in Africa.

No-one in Congo, or in the world for that matter, knew on February 23, 1961 what had actually happened to their friend and leader. It was Ludo de Witte, who in 1999 published the first fully documented authoritative report on the killing of Lumumba. The escort of four automobiles and two jeeps consisted of President Moise Tshombe of Katanga and the ministers Gabriel Kitenge, Godefroid Munongo, Jean-Baptiste Kibwe and police commissioner Plus Sapwe. Belgian captain M.P. Julien Gat, the Belgian advisor to Katanga, Frans Verscheure, Lieutenant Gabriel Michels, brigadier Francois Son and others were identified as having been part of the cortege that accompanied the Prime Minister to the secret place of execution. When leaving the cars, the prisoners wore only pants and an undershirt and were barefoot. Verscheure walked behind Lumumba, who asked him: ‘They are going to kill us, isn't it?’ Verscheure confirmed it. It was this Belgian advisor,

[p. 28]

who later announced to the three prisoners, that they were to be shot. He offered them some time, to prepare for death and pray. But Lumumba declined the offer. The excutioners were armed with Vigneron stenguns. De Witte described in detail every moment of the execution.

What is perhaps the most shocking of de Witte's reconstruction of the liquidation by Washington and Brussels of a man who literally never killed a fly, but who demonstrated genuine patriotism and love for his country, to start anew and build an independent African nation from the smoking ruins of Belgian colonialism and imperialism, that prior to de Witte no-one ever bothered to seriously discover what exactly had happened to this African hero. Let alone to begin a search for American and Belgian conspirators responsible for his untimely death. Lumumba' s rights were ignored and criminally neglected, both as citizen and family man, or as legal Prime Minister of the nation. It took till June 27, 2001 for Raoul Peck to bring out the movie Lumumba during the Film Forum of New York City.

18 September 1961 I noted in my diary writing at un headquarters in New York: ‘Something has happened to Dag Hammerskjöld. He disappeared somewhere in Northern Rhodesia in a dc-6b. Later the news said that while on a peace mission in Congo his plane came down 12 kilometers from Ndola Airport. There had been 14 people aboard. Only one security agent, Harold Julian of the un is alive. Hammerskjöld was about to meet Moise Thsombe. By 1 p.m. Ralph Bunche and Andrew Cordier were giving a press conference. Exact information was not yet available. Press Officer of the ussr Mission at the un, Mike Polonik said to me, ‘We perhaps sharply criticise the Secretary General, you, in the West simply kill him’.¹³ The disappearance of the Secretary-General of the un in 1961, so soon after the death of Lumumba, has since been shrouded in mystery as well. There were occasional reports, that the

13 Willem Oltmans, Memoires 1961, In den Toren, Baarn, 1989, p.p. 270.

[p. 29]

Swedish diplomat had indeed been murdered. In the wreckage of the plane investigators found one corpse more, than given on the passenger list. Who knows what certain intelligence services had in mind getting rid of him too. Who will eventually write the true story of what happened to him and why?

Castro

Following a lecture booked by W. Colston Leigh in West Palm Beach, I arrived January 21, 1960 with a Viscount plane of Cubana Airlines in Havana. Fidel Castro had descended in 1959 from the Sierra Maestra to take the country by storm. The us had reacted as a much wronged child, that had lost a favourite toy. Cuba was the preferred Caribbean vacation spot for Yankees with the many casinos and cheap whore houses. The young revolutionaries were intent to clean up Cuba's act, drive out the foreign gamblers and pimps, and bring some social justice to the place. Washington spy establishments worked overtime to put the pieces of the Castro jigsaw together. Was he a communist? The man was after the rich and defending the poor. To American simpletons this made his red sympathies abundantly clear. Communism had arrived at Uncle Sam's doorstep. Extreme measures were warranted. Eisenhower and Nixon planned a quick invasion. jfk, new at running Foreign Policy, almost forgot that the us was a signatory to the un Charter. When he was about to invade Cuba and use B-52 bombers from secret cia airfields in Guatemala, someone told him in the nick of time, that sending us pilots over Cuba amounted to an act of war against a fellow member state of the United Nations. Those were the years, that I lectured to us audiences from Sheboygan, Wisconsin to Corpus

[p. 30]

Christi, Texas and discovered, that a frightening number of perfectly law-abiding American citizens felt the us should have never joined the un

Fidel realized full well, that the us represented Cuba's primary life-line. Most of the sugar production went to the north American continent. Business tycoons preferred Cuban cigars. Castro boarded, after being only a few months in power, a flight to Washington. Realizing that his hands still showed the legacy of camping out in Cuban mountains, he allowed himself a manicure on the plane to present himself properly at the White House. President Eisenhower felt he was far too upperclass to award the bearded revolutionary entry into the Oval office. Probably his shoes weren't clean. Ike was therefore absent and played golf in Georgia. The job to talk to Castro was left to Richard Nixon, which guaranteed disastrous consequences. Nixon too avoided receiving the Cuban at the White House and saw his guest for two and the halfhours in the vice-presidential office at the Capitol Building. In his 703 page biography ‘Fidel’¹⁴, New York Times writer Tad Szulc recalled Castro was endlessly battered, while in Washington in April 1959, with questions about his Marxists sympathies. ‘We are not communists, ‘he replied over and over again’.¹⁵

‘In New York, he spent four days as a conquering hero,’ wrote Szulc, ‘touring the United Nations, addressing a nighttime crowd of 30.000 in Central Park, visiting the Coffee and Sugar Exchange and City Hall, and speaking at luncheons and dinners to publishers, businessmen and financiers. He made a superb impression,’ noted Szulc. From New York Castro travelled by train to Boston, delivered a speech at Harvard, and went on to Montreal. That was 1959. But the guys, Castro was really up against and did not meet were the evil spirits that ran the Washington Secret team. They had already firmly decided, that Fidel had to go. His mouth outsized his brain. He was a secret lackey of the Kremlin. A firm characteristic of

14 Tad Szulc, Fidel, William Morrow & Co., New York, 1986.

15 Tad Szulc, Fidel, William Morrow & Co., New York, 1986, p.p. 488.

[p. 31]

Washington spooks is, that they think they know, what goes on in Cuba, Vietnam, Congo, Indonesia or the ussr, to name a few of their favourite hunting grounds, while in reality these feeble minded bigots, that advise us presidents, have no clue of new realities in the world and are living in a fools paradise. What they do best is messing up other peoples lives out of ignorance and plain stupidity. Like Chancellor Konrad Adenauer of West-Germany once told Sir Ivon Kirkpatrick, the British High Commissioner in Bonn, ‘it is a pity that God limited the intelligence of man without limiting his stupidity.’¹⁶ Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty was once a liaison officer between the Pentagon and the cia. He wrote, that the most remarkable development during the first 25 years since World War II was the fundamental change in the management of Foreign Affairs in Washington. He meant, that more and more control over military and diplomatic operations at home and abroad was exerted by men whose activities are secret, whose budget is secret, whose very identities are secret. Prouty: ‘The Secret Team (st) consists of security-cleared individuals in and out government who receive secret intelligence data gathered by the cia and the National Security Agency (nsa)’, he noted in The Secret Team, with the subtitle: The cia and its Allies in Control of the United States and the World.¹⁷ ‘They react to those data, when it seems appropriate to them, with paramilitary plans and activities. Membership is granted on need to know basis.’

Speaking of the st power structure, colonel Prouty continued: ‘The power of the Team derives from its vast intergovernmental undercover infrastructure and its direct relationship with great private industries, mutual funds and investment houses, universities, and the news media, including foreign and domestic publishing houses.’ He stressed, that the st lived by ‘the cult of the gun, while it probably will never be revealed who killed Rafael Trujillo, Ngo Dinh Diem, Ngo Dinh

16 Ivon Kirkpatrick, Power and Diplomacy, Harvard University Press, 1948, p.p. 94.

17 L. Fletcher Prouty, The Secret Team, The cia and its Allies in Control of the United States and the World, Prentice-Hall Inc, New Jersey, 1973.

[p. 32]

Nhu, Dag Hammerskjöld, John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King and others.’ He continued, ‘At the heart of the st are, of course, a handful of top executives of the cia and the National Security Council (nsc), most notably the chief White House advisor to the President on Foreign Policy.’

‘Around them revolves a sort of inner ring of Presidential officials, civilians and military men from the Pentagon, and career professionals in the intelligence community. It is often quite difficult to tell exactly who many of these men really are, because some may wear a uniform and the rank of general and really be with the cia and others may be as inconspicuous as the executive assistant of some Cabinet officer's chief deputy. Out beyond this ring is an extensive and intricate network of government officials with responsibility for, or expertise in, some specific field that touches on national affairs or foreign affairs. All true members of the st remain in the power center whether in office with the incumbent Administration or out of office with the hardcore set. They simply rotate to and from official jobs and the business world or the pleasant haven of academe,’ Prouty summed up.

Ten years after the publication of The Invisible Government by David Wise and Thomas Ross an Air Force colonel, and eye witness from within the governing apparatus in Washington succeeded in presenting a clearer picture of the inner workings of the us ruling clique disguised in mysterious clouds. I went to see colonel Prouty in the seventies and filmed him for Dutch television. We kept in touch for the next quarter century. I mentioned him to Oliver Stone, who invited him to become his top advisor for the movie ‘jfk’, but later they fell out in disagreement. Colonel Prouty clarified who were the real Nimrods hunting down, for instance, Fidel Castro. He stressed to me, that the st was in fact a bewildering collection of semi-permanent or temporarily assembled action committees and

[p. 33]

networks that respond pretty much ad hoc to specific troublespots and to flash intelligence data inputs from various parts of the world. Those insider words echoed in my mind, when the Bush junior Administration managed to capture the power center in December 2000 and brought back an array of officials once close to his father, himself an ex cia boss. According to The New York Times, they speak at cia headquarters of ‘daddy's daily briefings’ referring to the fact, that Papa in Houston, Texas keeps his finger on the pulse of world affairs via cia information and then plays golf with his son to give fatherly advice. The Bush II Administration qualifies as a super Secret Team club.

The history of more than forty years of Secret War by the ST against Cuba is well-known. Fidel's trip to the us in 1959 was a flop, Inspire of Tad Szulc's evaluation that he did a superb job at selling the Revolution with those he spoke to. But he obviously met the wrong people. Eisenhower continued the blockade. jfk invaded the Bay of Pigs and us-Cuban relations reached a point of no return as a result of sheer ignorance and stupidity among the morons in the st. In 1961 a White House think tank designed ‘Operation Mongoose’. Details came only recently to light thanks to a British historian, Mark White, who published in 1999 The Kennedys and Cuba, The Declassified Documentary History¹⁸. Neither Castro, nor anyone in the world, was aware at the time, that Robert Kennedy was leading the National Security Committee 5412, set up in maximum secrecy in order to decide which foreign individuals or which foreign governments were to be liquidated or overthrown when they stood in the way of total American hegemony. I might add, that Castro biographer Szulc himself was asked by jfk, when they met at the White House, ‘What would you think, if I ordered Castro to be assassinated?’¹⁹

In 1972 Congress had woken up sufficiently from its hibernation and near blindness to what was happening in secret all

18 Mark White, The Kennedys and Cuba, The Declassified Documentary History, Ivan R. Dee Publishers, Chicago, 1999.

19 Mark White, The Kennedys and Cuba, The Declassified Documentary History, Ivan R. Dee Publishers, Chicago, 1999, p.p.558.

[p. 34]

around them, that it installed the Senator Frank Church Committee to look into the foolish blunders of the covert Wild Bill Boys. It was discovered, that with full knowledge of the White House Fidel had been subjected to receiving poison pills, a poison pen, poisoned cigars, a diving suit contaminated with disease-bearing fungus, and last but not least an exotic seashell, rigged to explode in an area where Castro usually went skin diving. These data were presented by David Wise in his book The American Police State²⁰. The Church Committee further discovered that criminal minds within the intelligence community had prepared for the killing of Fidel six gelatin capsules filled with a liquid botulinum toxin, which had first been tried on monkeys to make sure Castro would die from them too. jfk had established contacts with Chicago gangster Sam Giancana, and former Mafia boss in Havana, Santos Trafficante. The price on Fidel's head rose to 150.00 dollars to be paid by the White House. The plot was even strengthened by bringing in another mobster, formerly working for billionaire Howard Hughes, by the name of John Rosselli. He was the crook, who brought the six capsules to Havana. He knew that they would not work in hot soup. The plan never materialized, because the Soviets taught Castro how to protect himself.

Giancana was shot at his Chicago suburban home to prevent him from testifying in the Church Committee. Trafficante's corpse was found drifting in an oildrum of the coast off Florida. Rosselli denied he had anything to do with the gelatin capsules. Nobody seems to know how many assassination attempts were dreamt up in Washington against Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein, Sukarno, Nasser, Nkrumah, Qadaffi and scores of foreign leaders, because it will probably take another outside historian to skim the Washington secret files, or what is left of them, to discover the facts and the truth of who were or are the number one war criminals.

20 David Wise, The American Police State, Random House, New York, 1975, p.p. 215.

[p. 35]

In 1960, at a reception in the Algerian Embassy in Havana I met the entire revolutionary command, Fidel, Raoul, Che Guevara and others, plus dr. Carlos Rafael Rodriguez, those days the only long-time communist among the Fidelistas. He struck me as a man with an excellent mind. I stayed in touch with him and in 1985 we worked together on an interview book in the Presidencia in Havana, when Fidel asked us to wait until his own biography Tad Szulc was writing with him was finished and in the bookshops. I left for a stay of six years in South-Africa and although the first 100 pages were taped, written, and approved, we never resumed our work. The 64.000 dollar question about Fidel has always been: was he a communist, when he came down from the Sierra Maestra or did he become one in a defiant reaction to the us economic blockade and he was only saying, he had always been a communist, to get back at the Washington assassins.

On October 5, 1960, a summit of world leaders was in progress during the opening days of the 15th General Assembly at the un. The Rumanian permanent representative, Silvio Brucan gave a reception. Nikita Khrushchev was one of his guests. A few of us were talking with the Russian, when Harison Salisbury of The New York Times asked the premier whether he felt Fidel was a communist. ‘When we would have more leaders like Castro among socialist nations our prospects would not be good,’ he replied.²¹ The Politburo in Moscow obviously looked upon Fidel in the 1960's not to be taken seriously since they saw him as a bourgeois revolutionary.

I visited Cuba regularly since 1960. On May 2, 1962, I stood on the beach of the Bay of Pigs, trying to figure out how the st could have ever been that dumb to land there with 1.500 mercenaries being encircled by 20.000 angry Cuban soldiers ready for the kill. One subject that regularly came up in my frequent meetings over a period of 25 years with Carlos Rafael was the ultimate answer to the question if Fidel had always been a

21 Willem Oltmans, Memoires 1959-1961. In den Toren, Baarn, 1990, p.p. 171-172.

[p. 36]

commie. My conclusion is, that he had been telling the truth, when he visited Washington in 1959 and denied Communist links, and emphasized he was not prepared to be anybody's puppet, or dance with his nationalistic Latin anti-Yankee temperament to anyone's tune. A future historian will some day prove, that his supposed allegiance to Marxism-Leninism long before his Revolution was indeed Fidel's biggest lie. His propinquity after 1961 to the Kremlin was directly forced upon him by daydreamers and imbeciles in the Secret Team and elsewhere in Washington.

Sukarno

Indonesia declared Independence August 17, 1945. Sukarno became the first president of the fourth largest country in the world. Mohammed Hatta was his runningmate and became vice-president. The Dutch colonialists considered this declaration of freedom illegal and sent an Army to restore ‘order’. Holland launched two so-called police actions to destroy Sukarno's young Republic. Indonesia's foreign service had just been created and was working overtime in Washington. They hired lawyer Joseph Borkin to approach individual us Senators for help. A letter written by Borkin and signed by a dozen Senators got to President Truman's desk suggesting a withdrawal of us Marshall Plan aid to Holland if military actions against Indonesia were not halted forthwith. The trick worked. The Dutch Government withdrew its troops and transferred sovereignty December 30, 1949.

Borkin, an American Jew, became a close friend of the President of the world's largest Muslim nation. In 1978 Borkin published The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben with subtitle: The startling account of the unholy alliance of Adolf Hitler and

[p. 37]

Germany's great chemical combine.²² The Wall Street Journal called the book ‘a masterly account of an industrial machine gone mad.’ Joe was for many years a friend of mine. He kept all his documentation on Indonesia, including personal letters from Sukarno at hand, and was planning a book about the Indonesian President. An untimely heart failure ended Joe's life. His reminiscences about Sukarno were never written.

Naturally, the Washington intelligence fraternity was convinced, they knew best what kind of leftist fellow-travelling chap Sukarno really was. Already in 1950 a Dutch soldier of fortune, Werner Verrips, was commissioned to investigate how Sukarno could be gotten rid of in an unobtrusive manner. With his partners he robbed on December 20, 1950 a bank in Surabaya, East Java, to finance this bravado enterprise. Verrips was arrested, spent a number of years in an Indonesian jail, returned to Holland, resumed his undercover activities and died in an automobile accident December 4, 1964.

The 1958 cia coup against Sukarno I referred to earlier. In between there were at least five attempts on Sukarno's life, who all failed. A second full scale coup occurred in 1965. I saw it coming. So did Sukarno. It was for a long time in the works. In 1962 Ujeng Suwargana, an envoy for general Abdul Haris Nasution, travelled to Paris, Bonn, The Hague and Washington to inform politicians, diplomats, publishers and journalists, that Sukarno was to be overthrown. Nasution would become head-of-state. Ujeng visited me in New York and I took him and his wife on March 17, 1962 to dinner at my favorite Greenwich Village restaurant ‘Finale’. He quoted Sukarno as once having said, ‘I am like a flower, I am rather picked than withering away’, by which the President had meant according to this man, that he preferred to die a hero, than he would be forced to resign the presidency.’²³

It became clear to me that evening in New York, that a group

22 Joseph Borkin, The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben, The startling account of the unholy alliance of Adolf Hitler and Germany's great chemical combine, Macmillan, New York, 1978.

23 Willem Oltmans, Memoires 1961-1963, Papieren Tijger, Breda, 1997, p.p. 75-77.

[p. 38]

of generals were plotting against their President. Since Sukarno had became increasingly surrounded by sycophants and schemers of Indonesian intelligence services under the direction of Foreign Minister dr. Subandrio, the President and I set up a secret channel, through which we could circumvent unwarranted sabotage of our contacts. For many years I sent letters through general Suhardjo Hardjowardojo, the chief of the military house of the President. Sometimes with questions, sometimes with information. When The Invisible Gavernment was published in 1964, I immediately drew Sukarno's attention via our private channel to this publication. In The American Police State in 1975, David Wise mentioned, that somewhat to his surprise, the Indonesian Embassy in Washington D.C. ordered in 1964 twenty copies of his first book to be distributed among members of the Indonesian cabinet.²⁴ Also, Sukarno called in us ambassador Howard Jones and lectured him on the unacceptability of the behaviour of ‘the invisible government’ in Washington.

David Wise mentioned in 1975 as well, how the cia had gone into the pornographic movie business, financing a porno film, Happy Days, starring an actor resembling President Sukarno. The Intelligence Committee of the House of Representatives discovered this idiotic gem, for which an Asian man had undergone plastic surgery so he would look more like the Indonesian head-of-state, who at the time was in power. It was the Secret team's way of trying to damage Sukarno's reputation. Reading in 2001 The New York Times bestseller, The Hunting of the President, The Ten Year Campaign to destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton by Joe Conason & Gene Lyons the professional Washington ‘hunters’ of enemies have indeed considerably improved their Gestapo skills.²⁵

Wise named in his 1975 book additional cia plums. King Hussein of Jordan, and various other foreign leaders, were regularly procured by women, who were paid by federal funds.

24 David Wise, The American Police State, Random House, New York, 1975, p.p. 199.

25 Joe Conason & Gene Lyons, The Hunting of the President, The Ten Year Campaign to destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton, St. Martin's Press, New York, 413 pages.

[p. 39]

The cia under direct pressure from both lbj and Nixon launched ‘Operation Chaos’, which meant spying on us citizens, infiltrating antiwar groups, and compiling unfavourable files on 300.000 people. The cia experimented with mind altering drugs on persons that did not know hallucinogens were being given to them. The cia provided disguises to the White House burglars who broke into Watergate. The cia, in violation of its charter, prepared a psychological profile of Daniel Ellsberg, the patriot who leaked the notorious Pentagon Papers to The New York Times. In violation of strict federal law, the cia secretly opened, read, photographed and resealed hundreds of thousands of letters dispatched within the us. They are most likely doing the same today, probably on a considerably larger scale.

With lbj's decision to widen the war in Vietnam Sukarno became a liability to the Washington warmongers in Southeast Asia. He clearly sided with China and North-Vietnam and felt the us had no business in Asia at all. This made him in the eyes of the st and their congenial spirits in the invisible government, a Communist as well. Don't ever expect subtle nuances from the mindscapes of us intelligence boys. The jfk Administration had gone out of its way to lend an ear to Sukarno's views. The Kennedy's respected him for his 1955 initiative of bringing Afro-Asian nations together in Bandung. Sukarno created the Non-Aligned Movement of governments, that were prepared to play a mediating role between the superpowers and try to get the Cold War over with.

The second Non-Aligned conference was held in Belgrade in 1961. As special envoys of that summit, Jawaharlal Nehru (India) and Kwame Nkrumah (Ghana) flew to Moscow: Sukarno (Indonesia) and Modibo Keita (Mali) flew to Washington. The nations of the developing world were urging Khrushchev and Kennedy to halt the arms race and stop building ever more missiles with multiple nuclear warheads. The simple message

[p. 40]

was: don't waste your brains and resources on inventions how to wipe each other out, but sit down and talk together until you find a compromise acceptable to both.

Roger Hilsman demonstrated in chapter 25 of his book that the Kennedy Administration did read the finer points in Sukarno's mind. He recalled that the Indonesian leader's two visits to the Kennedy White House went well. ‘Kennedy recognized the politician and dedicated nationalist in Sukarno’. Aside from the embarrassing ignorance of American spies on the subject of Sukarno, members of Congress competed with each other as to who would find the biggest insult. Congressman William Bloomfield, also a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, called Sukarno in a speech on the floor of the House, ‘a power-mad dictator, a despot, a bully, a Hitler and an international juvenile delinquent’²⁶ Hilsman mentioned these details in his book to illustrate what he, as jfk's Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, was up against. ‘In Congress’, he wrote, ‘knowledge of Indonesia was superficial at best.’ Those then are the blessings of democracy at work.

‘Shortly after Averell Harriman (former us ambassador to Moscow and London and governor of the state of New York) was nominated by jfk to succeed Hilsman as Under Secretary of State for Far eastern Affairs, he gave a television interview. The questioner dropped the remark, ‘that Communist Sukarno.’ Harriman got mad and snorted back: ‘He is not a communist, he is a nationalist!’.²⁷

During Sukarno's April 25, 1961 visit to the Oval Office, jfk had asked him to elaborate on where the Indonesian leader stood on the Cold War. He replied, that he was prepared to tell jfk, but only to him and alone. They withdrew to Kennedy's bedroom and they talked there. Of course, jfk was better informed on Sukarno, than representative Bloomfield, who behaved like a silly blabbermouth, or better than the Donovan boys in

26 Roger Hillsman, To Move a Nation, Doubleday & Co, New York, 1967 p.p. 376.

27 Roger Hillsman, To Move a Nation, Doubleday & Co, New York, 1967 p.p. 378.

[p. 41]

the invisible government. While jfk was making the effort to become informed on Indonesia and its leader, Dallas ended all of that. With Lyndon Johnson, the Eisenhower-Dulles mentality returned to the White House, which meant in practice, the cia was getting a free hand again and a second opportunity to set up a coup in Jakarta and get rid of Sukarno permanently.

The Secret Team scenario for these bloody events is always the same. First rumours are spread, in this case by Ujeng Suwaragana and others, that a Council of Generals had been formed to topple Sukarno. The president took these whispers seriously and dispatched one of his aides, colonel Magenda to Washington and New York to check out the Ujeng story. It proved to be true. When in the night of September 30, 1965 some members of the presidential Tjakrabirawa Guard picked up six top generals, including general Yani, Chief of the Army, who was a blameless Sukarno loyalist, the confusion was total. The enemies of the President led by general Suharto, were promptly accusing Sukarno of having launched a pre-emptive strike against his presumed enemies. Events that fateful night in Indonesian history amounted to a shrewd scheme.

Sukarno's immense popularity with the masses was intentionally placed under a cloud of suspicion. Indonesians became confused and did not rally around their president as expected under normal circumstances. Did he side with the Communists as his enemies were saying? When General Suharto and officers loyal to him, discovered the six generals had been killed, they attributed these murders to Gerwani, women of the pki (Partai Kommunis Indonesia). In other words, the 1965 coup, like its predecessor in 1958, was portrayed as fundamentally necessary to prevent the Communists from grabbing power. This time the people were told after Suharto took control over the media, that Sukarno himself had sided with the pki. The people should have known better

[p. 42]

but the killings of the generals placed the verisimilitude on the side of Suharto. Even Peking was said to have been directly involved, an additional lie dreamt up in Washington.

October 1, 1965, Sukarno intended to replace General Yani with General Pranoto Reksosamudro. But Suharto decided differently. He appointed himself Commander-in-Chief of the Army. That was the decisive moment that the 1965 coup took place. There and then Suharto committed insubordination and high treason vis à vis Sukarno as President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Suharto's noble alibi, ‘save the nation from Communism.’

With Sukarno's influence reduced to a semblance of presidential power, Suharto was soon to become the Pot Pot of Southeast Asia. While the Indonesian military dictator butchered peasants, workers and citizens to the left, Pot Pot did the same with the intelligentsia and people to the right. According to Washington, Suharto was doing a similar splendid job. In reality, Pot Pot was a first class War Criminal and so was Suharto.

Suharto began by summarily liquidating the entire top of the pki. The st in Washington danced. Next Suharto ordered bloodthirsty paratroop colonel Sarwo Edhie to organize a nationwide raid on Communists, and pro Sukarno patriots, which resulted in the largest bloodbath Southeast Asia had hitherto seen. The Economist estimated the mass extermination of suspected Communists and Sukarno loyalists following the 1965 coup at 500.000. Suharto truly makes Slobodan Milosevic pale into a miserable amateur. Yet, Milosevic is sweating it out as a War Crimes suspect in The Hague, while it proved impossible to bring Suharto to book, after he was driven out of power in 1998. The best his successors could do, is place him under house-arrest. Washington always continues to protect War Criminals that served them well. Augusto Pinochet of Chili is another case in point. A lifetime patronage of cia rogues is

[p. 43]

guaranteed by the Secret Team. At the same time, this Washington protection of War Criminals increases suspicions that chaps like Suharto, Mobuto or Pinochet were indeed murdering and stealing as Quislings for Washington carrying out the wishes of the invisibles of the cia.

Even Bill Clinton had referred in the nineties to Suharto as ‘our boy in Jakarta’. It might have been a slip of the tongue, but at the same time it tells the story of Washington's selective indignation, when people are massacred in our nowadays world. Killing leftists is good. Killing rightists is bad. Intelligence operations are designed to protect the killers and prevent the truth from ever becoming known. Sometimes by accident bits and pieces do surface. Former State Department official, William Blum, wrote in 2000 about the 1965 Jakarta coup: ‘it was later learned that the us embassy in Indonesia had compiled lists of “Communists”, from the top echelon down to village cadres, as many as 5.000 names, and turned them over to the Army (Suharto) which then hunted those persons down and killed them.’²⁸ Blum referred to an Associated Press story of a former us diplomat in Jakarta who finally did talk.

28 William Blum, Rogue State, A Guide to the World's Only Superpower, Common Courage Press, Monroe, Maine, p.p. 141.

Sihanouk

Sukarno and prince Norodom Sihanouk of the kingdom of Cambodia were since many years friends and shared views on world affairs, including within the group of non-aligned Afro-Asian nations. When Sukarno was ousted by a cia coup, Sihanouk said in an interview, that he did not understand, how the Indonesian President could have been taken by surprise knowing for a long time, that the cia had targeted him. However, the prince was going to be faced with a cia surprise him-

[p. 44]

self. March 18, 1970, while Sihanouk was in Moscow for a stop-over on his way home, he became another cia victim, when traitor General Lon Nol grabbed power in Pnom Penh. Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger were still on the warpath in Southeast Asia and had decided on the advice of the bright minds within the Secret Team, that it was best to quickly invade Laos and Cambodia as well, because it would prevent Ho Chi-minh from supplying the Vietcong in the south. Sihanouk was not prepared to accept us troops operating on Cambodian soil. Therefore, he had to go. Hence, the Lon Nol coup. April 30, 1970 the us invasion began. Washington policy-makers had long ceased to observe international law or worry about violating treaties Washington had promoted and duly signed, like the Charter of the un, which protected Cambodia from this type of Hitlerite invasion, at least on paper. Nixon and Kissinger followed strictly Third Reich methods in achieving their goals.

In his book, written with journalist Wilfrid Burchett, My War with the cia²⁹, prince Sihanouk said, ‘It is worse than what Hitler did (...) What is the difference between burning and gassing people in ovens and doing it to a whole nation in the open? That is just what the us of President Nixon is doing today (...) In Cambodia, it is happening before our eyes, as part of a deliberate us policy (...) to destroy present an future generations of Cambodians by also destroying our environment. Once nature dies, man also dies.’

The terrorists in Washington plainly waged genocide in Cambodia, as they were already doing for years in Vietnam and as they did five years before in Indonesia with the assistance of another cia traitor, Suharto. Sihanouk spoke of ‘the barbaric us aggression’ in his country. He recalled he had often pondered the dangers that had been looming from Washington. ‘The only thing I had not anticipated, was that the us would take part directly in trying to tear our country to pieces (...)

29 Sihanouk and Wilfrid Burchett, My War with the cia, Allen Lane, London, 1973.

[p. 45]

We were being punished, humiliated, and being prepared for the choppingbloc, because we had stood on our dignity. We refused to become us puppets, or join the anti-communist crusade. We spurned the billion dollars rewards for such a role. That was our crime in the eyes of successive us Administrations.’ Sukarno could have written the same lines, I know.

The prince explained in his book why he refused to submit to Washington's wishes to allow us troops to engage in combat with the north Vietnamese on Cambodian soil. ‘To cover up their battlefield defeats in South Vietnam, American commanders, especially Generals William Westmoreland and Creighton Abrams maintained the only thing preventing complete us victory was the existence of sanctuaries in Cambodia used by the Vietcong.’ Sihanouk refused. ‘It would have meant surrendering our neutrality. Secondly, I, together with a vast majority of Cambodian people, sympathised with Vietnamese resistance against us aggression.’ He made it clear, ‘It is true, I did not want Communism in Cambodia. Under the influence of Lon Nol - as I clearly understood when it was too late - he wanted me to concentrate my attention on an enemy of the left to conceal his own plotting on the extreme right.’ Of course, Sihanouk wanted to return immediately after the news of the coup from Moscow to Pnom Penh. ‘But Lon Nol was thorough and ruthless,’ he noted. The cia indeed works preferably with bloody murderers. The prince was informed, that if he had at the time of the coup been in his homeland, he would have been killed. Now, the plotters feared his speedy return. What if in the end the Army would side with him instead of Lon Nol? Therefore, a message was sent to Moscow, that whatever company would fly the legal head-of-state back to Cambodia, the plotters would confiscate the plane and arrest the crew. The prince called Lon Nol ‘an archtraitor.’³⁰

Sihanouk experienced the same problems with Eisenhower

30 Sihanouk and Wilfrid Burchett, My War with the cia, Allen Lane, London, 1973, p.p. 56.

[p. 46]

and Dulles, as Sukarno had in the fifties. He talked in 1953 for one hour with John Foster Dulles in Washington and came away from the meeting alarmed. Dulles had shouted at the prince: ‘Defeat Communism in your area!’ Quite disarmingly, Sihanouk noted in his book, ‘I felt like telling him not to worry too much about our affairs.’³¹

Both leaders were convinced the Eisenhower Administration suffered from an ‘idée fixe’ about Communism. Suharto between 1965 and 1967, when he finally took de facto power, exerted extreme pressure on President Sukarno to condemn the Partai Kommunis Indonesia (pki) for the coup of 1965. Like Sihanouk, Sukarno too, knew that this second effort to oust him, was purely and exclusively another Washington initiated affair. President Sukarno, whom I visited at length during October 1966 and filmed for Dutch television - I bagged at the same time Suharto's first tv interview ever - was just as certain as prince Sihanouk, who the real guilty party was. While Suharto, edged on by American agents, who were in constant touch with his top aides, launched a nationwide witch hunt. Suharto's soldiers were decapitating communists with the cia supplied list in hand. They obviously began to like their job. Not the 5.000 people on the cia list were hacked to death - the Army of Suharto tried to save bullets - but hundreds of thousands of Indonesians were slaughtered in the wake of the murder of six of their generals. If that bloodbath does not qualify the fascist Indonesian dictator for a one-way ticket to The Hague, what does? Perhaps Pot Pot did surpass Suharto as an Asian war criminal, but he passed away some time ago and is unable to stand trial anymore. Does this mean Suharto should go free, because the cia still protects Lyndon Johnson's boy, who, 30 years later was Clinton's boy?

During a series of conversations with President Sukarno during October 1966, both at the Merdeka Palace in Jakarta and the Bogor Summer Palace in the mountains, it became clear to

31 Sihanouk and Wilfrid Burchett, My War with the cia, Allen Lane, London, 1973, p.p. 154.

[p. 47]

me, that the father of the nation, like his friend Sihanouk, was firmly convinced that Indonesia like Cambodia had suffered a mortifying blow through direct cia intervention by playing generals against each other. To him, what had happened during the night of September 30-October 1, 1965 was an inter-Army affair intentionally provoked by the cia. The President was convinced the pki was not guilty of what Suharto and his clique accused them of. Who really wished the Indonesian Communists decimated? The Wild Bill Donovan boys were running a crusade against communists everywhere. Washington was once more the guilty party as Super Rogue State in the world. Not Moscow and not Peking, as the Suharto evildoers and the cia were saying.

Sihanouk referred in his book to the Suharto coup and wrote, ‘With the help of psychological warfare specialists from Indonesia who had engineered a slander campaign against Sukarno, Lon Nol and Sink Matak whipped up a campaign against the monarchy.’³² Like in Jakarta in 1965, in Pnom Penh in 1970 slogans appeared everywhere, accusing the monarchy of always having been traitors. Where did Lon Nol and Suharto - the real traitors - get their script from? From the criminals in Washington, who trumped up these barefaced lies in their screwy crusade against Marxism-Leninism. In Jakarta, indeed, the cia followed a similar scenario. In 1966, when I was there, Suharto and the Army were whipping up anti-Sukarno sentiments through so-called action-fronts, like kabi, Indonesian Worker's Action Front, kagi, Indonesian Teachers Action Front, kami, Indonesian Students Action Front, kappi, Indonesian High School Students and Youths Action Front, kasi, Indonesian Scholars Action Front, and kawi, Indonesian Women's Action Front.

I went to see the guys of the kami and filmed them I interviewed a leader Cosmas Batubara, a hot tempered and empty headed idiot, who had no clue to what extent he was being

32 Sihanouk and Wilfrid Burchett, My War with the cia, Allen Lane, London, 1973, p.p. 216.

[p. 48]

used by Army traitors. Indonesians were like wax in the hands of rogue elements at the top of the us Government. Cosmas was largely rewarded by Suharto for the violent demonstrations he helped organize against Sukarno and appointed cabinet minister to join the stool pigeons that were stealing themselves rich. Army trucks shuttled the anti Sukarno demonstrators to wherever they were planning trouble for the legal Government. Where the funds came from to finance the anti Sukarno baiting was anybody's guess. President Sukarno mentioned these activities to me and had received information that, for instance, camouflage jackets had come from us clothing dumps, and had been paid for by Australian intelligence, always ready to back up the us and British services when they were somewhere on the warpath. He spoke directly about the cia involvement in Jakarta to me, as Sihanouk did in his 1973 book. After 1967 Sukarno became a prisoner of Suharto and was never in a position to write additional memoirs. He, too, would have chosen the title, My War with the cia.

Sukarno, too, could have written a passage that Sihanouk entered in his book. He lived at the time in Peking and often talked with Mao Tsetung. During one such conversation, Mao observed: ‘Prince Sihanouk, I like to talk with you. You speak frankly and express your ideas courageously (...) You deserve to be a Communist.’ The prince replied: ‘Monsieur le President, really I can't.’ Mao laughed and said: ‘You are intelligent, you are hard working. You could start studying.’ Sihanouk replied: ‘I am too lazy to plough through the works of Marx, Lenin and others.’³³

Sukarno had not been too lazy to page through Communist philosophers. During eleven and a half years of detention in the days of Dutch colonialism, he had spent his time well and read hundreds of books. He knew exactly why he was opposed to dictatorship in any form. As he sneered in his autobiography, published in New York the year of the second cia coup,

33 Sihanouk and Wilfrid Burchett, My War with the cia, Allen Lane, London, 1973, p.p. 208.

[p. 49]

that he, Sukarno, ‘lover of God was being labelled a fat communist.’³⁴ He was aware of the nonsense us media were writing about him, or of the insults heaped on him in Congress. He asked whether there was a difference between being forced to lie, as the controlled press in communist countries was doing or being totally free to lie, as western media were doing. ‘Both are equally destructive’, he added.³⁵

Incidentally, Sukarno recalled in his memoir his 1956 official visit to the White House. Eisenhower did not meet his plane, like jfk did in 1961. Eisenhower did not welcome Sukarno entering the White House. He even made his Indonesian guest wait one hour in an anteroom, when Sukarno finally asked the Chief of Protocol in a sharp tone what was going on. Only then, he was rushed into the Oval Office. Ike's boorish behavior was, of course, totally inexcusable. He had probably been advised to make a fool of himself by the two psychotic characters, who were his top-advisors at the time, John Foster Dulles (State Department) and Allen Dulles (cia). Unfortunately, the much hailed Western democratic system of managing state affairs, virtually guarantees installing persons to jobs they are indubitably unsuited for. Which reminds me of a longtime friendship with dr. Arnold Hutschnecker, the Park Avenue psychiatrist, consulted by Richard Nixon after he lost the California election. Hutschnecker, now 102 years old, has campaigned since the 70s for ‘Psychiatry at High Levels of Government’³⁶.

‘Perhaps the time has come for us,’ he wrote, ‘the people who love our country, who respect its laws, who cherish freedom and who are responsible and independent men and women (...) to apply psychodynamic principles and explore possibilities other than purely political to secure that our best and brightest leaders are also our mentally and morally healthiest and soundest.’ Hutschnecker flatly advocated, that future us leaders should have their heads examined - as is be-

34 Cindy Adams, Sukarno: An Autobiography, Bobbs Merrill Company, New York, 1965, p.p. 278.

35 Cindy Adams, Sukarno: An Autobiography, Bobbs Merrill Company, New York, 1965, p.p. 281.

36 Op-Ed page, The New York Times, July 4, 1973.

[p. 50]

ing done with applications for top jobs in the business world - prior to announcing their candidacy for the White House. A quarter of a century has passed since this sensible suggestion was first put on paper, but nothing has changed. Remember Texas and Florida in 2000.

The Cambodian killing-fields became a symbol to the world of what happens if us rogues of the likes of Nixon and Kissinger run amok. The mass slaughter of millions following the Nixon-Kissinger invasion of 1970 was not the result of aggression by Moscow or Peking, but bore the mark of the cia, the Pentagon, and the neurotic Secret Team, that had gone on a rampage once more, this time in Southeast Asia to save the world for freedom and democracy. Only a quarter of a century later an aged Sihanouk finally returned to his land of birth, to find it in smoking ruins courtesy of the American liberators who in 1970 installed the Quisling puppet Lon Nol.

Old Henry continues to publish books, like his most recent masterpiece Does America Need a Foreign Policy?. Nick Cohen reviewed the book in the London Observer and stressed, that the poor man keeps to rail against tyrants, totally oblivious to his own guilt. He received when in Paris a summons from a French judge, who wanted to question him in relation to French citizens that disappeared during the Pinochet regime in Chili. Kissinger refused to accept the papers and left France in a hurry. In Chili a judge wanted to question him about the murder of Charles Horman, an American journalist. Cohen added, ‘Like a terrorist who refuses to recognise the validity of the courts, Kissinger rejects in his book the validity of prosecution in the abstract without once mentioning the charge sheet or declaring his interest.’ And Cohen ends: ‘Kissinger complains that politicians who may have murdered thousands are treated like ordinary criminals who kill one or two. Not once does he acknowledge or attempt to refute the allegation that he is covered in enough blood to make a psychopath wince.’

[p. 51]

Bhutto

Ali Bhutto, Foreign Minister at the time he became a friend of Sukarno, and later Prime Minister of Pakistan was hanged April 4, 1979 at 2 a.m. He was a sharp critic of us Foreign Policy. Pakistan was historically a Washington ally and for many years a member of the South East Asia Treaty Organisation (seato). This was a us and British initiated pact to so-called protect the region from supposed Communist hordes dispatched by Peking, or for that matter from the ussr. Bhutto agreed with Sukarno and Sihanouk, that American soldiers should quit the former Indo-China altogether. He emphasized this critical stance of Washington even at un headquarters. That was the last straw for what the Secret Team could stomach from Bhutto. The crazy minds of these disreputable us characters wanted the man stone dead, and that is, as usual, what they get.

On the very day General Zia-ul Haq declared Martial Law for Pakistan, July 5, 1977, Bhutto was arrested. Five and a half years, he had served his country as a Foreign Minister, as Prime Minister and President, as well as Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces. From one day to the other he was called by general Zia ‘a demoniac threat to the security of Pakistan.’ Bhutto had all along been very much aware that ‘the bloodhounds are after my blood,’ he had warned in a speech in parliament referring to ‘an international conspiracy’ to get him. This meant: Washington, who else?

In 1966, his friend Sukarno related to me an incident that took place a year earlier in Caïro. The Indonesian President and the then Foreign Minister Bhutto, were talking in the lobby of a hotel, when Sukarno was approached by an American girl, introducing herself as Pat Price. She said, she was planning a book on Indonesia and was Sukarno prepared to help her?

[p. 52]

The President made a promise and Pat went on her way. But Ali Bhutto said ‘Watch out’ and was suspicious of another cia move. Sukarno: ‘I arranged for her to come to Indonesia. I received her at Merdeka Palace. I gave her a female assistant to easily find her way around. She started work. After a few months I was handed a report by our intelligence service. That sweet, coquettish Miss Price turned out to indeed be a cia agent. She had been carefully followed by our security service. She used everywhere my name, and my introduction, and misused my assistance and our hospitality, because in fact she was an ordinary cia spy.’

‘How certain are you she was cia?’, I asked. ‘She had meetings in the middle of the night with other us agents. She had frequent encounters with members of the us Embassy at unusual times and at unusual places. What especially drew the attention of our service were camouflaged meetings with the us military attaché. She succeeded to work herself into some of the highest circles of our military establishment.’³⁷

Like Sihanouk and Bhutto, President Sukarno was very much aware of the cia's dirty business in Southeast Asia. On October 6, 1966, Sukarno told me: ‘The cia is fishing in troubled waters of eight countries in our region. President Nasser warned me. He sent a general as a personal envoy, who had been instructed only to speak with me. They had discovered documentary proof in Egypt of cia activities here. Other documentary proof had been found in Syria, because the ambassador of that country came to see me likewise. You are a journalist. You must go on digging for the facts.’ I might add, here that also Mrs. Indira Gandhi, Prime Minister of India, whom I interviewed and filmed three times in the seventies and eighties referred repeatedly to ‘the contemptible cia games’ in India.³⁸

Ali Bhutto was able to write a book in prison. I often wished Sukarno had been able to do so. His views of the 1965 coup would have been of vital historic importance. He had received

37 Willem Oltmans, Den Vaderland Getrouwe, Bruna, 1973, p.p. 309-310.

38 Willem Oltmans, On Growth, Putnam & Sons, New York, 1975.

[p. 53]

two intelligence reports about the events that fateful night from September 30 - October 1. He believed neither one. He remained puzzled about which firecracker had gone off first. He knew, that the framers of the plot resided in Washington, but how did they manage to recruit so many traitors from within the Indonesian military structures? Dollars and promises for more dollars had played a major role.

From my Death Cell³⁹ dealt in detail with the conspiracy that led to Zia's 1977 coup d'état, when Bhutto was arrested. He had expected it. He told the National Assembly on April 28, 1977 that he foresaw trouble. The next day, April 29, Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance, sent Bhutto a message proposing ‘personal quiet talks’. Vance was a decent man. This was reason enough for the invisibles to operate in specific cases and covert operations entirely outside the State Department and if need be outside the White House. Bhutto, knowing that Vance probably had been kept in the dark about the cia conspiracy in progress against him, showed the American invitation to hold talks the next day in Rawalpindi in public. The chargé d'affaires of the us Embassy let it be known immediately, that when confidential talks were leaked beforehand, it would be difficult to organize them. Of course, the cia did not want Vance to talk at all with Bhutto, because the Pakistani leader had already been marked for liquidation anyway.

Nevertheless, Bhutto sent his Foreign Minister to Paris with a 50 page report documenting charges, that foreign intelligence services were busy destabilizing Pakistan. The report was quietly handed to Cyrus Vance personally. The Secretary of State proposed, however, to shelve the 50 page report and instead make a fresh start in us-Pakistani relations. While staying in a Paris hotel, the suite of the Pakistani Foreign Minister was ransacked. The 50 page intelligence report had been locked up in the safe of the Embassy of Pakistan in Paris. Bhutto later sent this crucial intelligence report to a conference of Islamic Foreign Ministers in Tripoli, Lybia.

39 Ali Bhutto, From my Death Cell, Orient Paperbacks, New Delhi, 1980.

[p. 54]

Bhutto took up his own defence. He wrote in his book, that he told the judges, ‘I have been in a death cell, 7 by 10 feet for over one year now. I feel a little dizzy there. I do not want to mention here whatever has been done to me. I do not want to show marks on my body or anything like that (...) It has been said that I was a tyrant, a dictator, a Hitler (...) believe me, I have been very shabbily treated (...) For ninety days I have not seen the sunshine or the light.’⁴⁰

He recalled before his judges, that while he was in power, he had negotiated the return of 90.000 prisoners of war from India. ‘Yet, I am now treated like a criminal. I am not a criminal, but I am treated worse then the co-accused. I can hear in my cell the sound of music. I hear the laughter of other prisoners in my death cell from which I cannot get out. On October 15, when two prisoners ran away, I was locked up. What did I have to do with their escape? I cannot and will not run away from my country. I was advised to leave. Mr. Mustafa Khar told me, “these people are after your blood.” On September 13, a foreign journalist, whose name I cannot mention, took me aside and said, Mr. Bhutto, I cannot tell you what is in store for you. You better leave this country.’

In Indonesia, the same happened when Sukarno was already the semi-prisoner of General Suharto. Adam Malik, once a friend of Sukarno pleaded with him to please leave the country. Malik had joined the cia traitors, but perhaps felt some remorse and wished his former friend a better old age then he knew Suharto had in store for him. Sukarno was placed in total isolation in villa ‘Wisma Jaso’ of his Japanese wife, Ratna Sari Dewi. Madame Dewi had left for Tokyo in 1967 for her safety at the urging of her husband and had delivered their daughter, Karina, in Japan. Madame Hartini, his Indonesian wife, was virtually his only infrequent visitor, while his children rarely received permission to go and see him. All other visitors were barred. Here was the father of the nation being

40 Ali Bhutto, From my Death Cell, Orient Paperbacks, New Delhi, 1980. Chapter 2.

[p. 55]

tormented to death by treacherous generals of the very nation, he, Sukarno, had led to freedom. One general stole his last automobile. Another, general Alam Sjah walked in to take away his last television set, to further isolate Sukarno from the outside world. He died as a flower without water on June 20, 1970, exactly as one of his murderers, Ujeng Suwargana had come to tell me in 1962 in New York, what the generals were going to do to him.

Bhutto told his judges: ‘I do not want mercy. I want justice. I am not pleading for my life as such, not as a way of flesh, because everyone has to go. There have been so many attacks on my life. I was attacked at Sangkar. I escaped miraculously in Sadigabad. Then in the frontier tribal territories a bomb exploded just before I was to speak. There were at least four of five attempts in Baluchistan, once by a Langah, who threw a handgrenade at me. The Khan of Kalat, who was one of my closest friends, told me not to go for I would be killed. I said, I have to do my public duty, and addressed a public meeting. It is not life I plead for. I want justice.’

Sukarno named in his autobiography the series of attempts on his life as well.⁴¹ November 30, 1957 several handgrenades were tossed at the President, when he visited at Tjikini the school where two of his children were following classes. His aide-de-camps, colonel Sudarto, threw Sukarno to the ground shielding him with his body and getting wounded by shrapnel. On March 9, 1960, Daniel Maukar took an Indonesian mig fighter and strafed the palace. The President was a forgiving soul. I asked him if the death sentence against Maukar would be carried out. He shook his head, no. The young pilot was indeed set free. Sukarno invited him for heart to heart talk. Also Allan Pope, the cia pilot, who had been shot down in 1957 during a bombing raid over the island of Ambon, and was captured, was set free after his wife had come to the palace begging in tears for fis freedom. ‘When it comes to

41 Cindy Adams, Sukarno: An Autobiography, Bobbs Merrill Company, New York, 1965, p.p. 272-274.

[p. 56]

women,’ he wrote in his autobiography, ‘I am weak. I cannot stand tears.’

Bhutto and Sukarno were exposed to a series of assassination attempts. Who arranged them and paid for them? Mrs. Indira Gandhi told me, that people would kill someone in India for a miserable thirty rupees. It should be noted, that cia puppet Suharto, during 32 years in the presidency, was never shot at once. In retrospect, I feel both Sukarno and Ali Bhutto, while being fully aware that they were targeted by the cia, downright underestimated the brutal, inexorable minds and methods of the ultimate bosses of locally hired killers. In regard to Sukarno, I can unequivocally testify to the fact, that he was a kind-hearted and forgiving man, who signed one deathwarrant in his life. It was for Kartosuwirjo, a brutal killer, who had gone on a rampage to establish the Darul Islam with the aim to create an Iran type of Muslim State. The courts had condemned him to death. Sukarno deliberated with himself in silence for one week, whether to attach his signature. The children where at a loss why their father seemed in a daze. They didn't know the reason. Washington had little use of ‘a softy’ in Jakarta. They were in need of a hungry masskiller, who was prepared to root out the pki tooth and nail and while doing so butcher as many leftists as his Army could lay its hands on. They picked Suharto and hit the jackpot.

Bhutto recalled in his memoir written from his death cell a direct threat, ‘We will make a horrible example of you!’ by Henry Kissinger, who, mind you, was talking to the head-of-state of Pakistan⁴². I have been a resident of New York from 1958-1992. It took me many years to finally acknowledge that American mindscapes tick often that way. Get rid of the guy who is in your way. Shoot him. Kissinger, a Jew, who immigrated in childhood from Germany, simply adopted the us way of thinking. He came to fit Yankee habitudes like a glove. He managed to turn himself into one of the most prestigious

42 Ali Bhutto, From my Death Cell, Orient Paperbacks, New Delhi, 1980, p.p. 65.

[p. 57]

and powerful men in Washington, even bagging a Nobel prize, while he was more than responsible for us war crimes in Southeast Asia and elsewhere. Who in his right mind would suggest in 2001 to nominate Slobodan Milosevic for the much coveted Stockholm reward?

January 5, 1979 Ali Bhutto turned 51. Following February 6, Chief Justice Anwarul Haq read out the Court's decision by a 4 to 3 majority, that upheld the death sentence for the former President and Prime Minister Ali Bhutto. The judgement contained 1.500 pages. Bhutto was informed of the verdict by the guard outside his cell. Messages from all over the world including President Jimmy Carter and Prime Minister James Callaghan of Great-Britain arrived to spare his life. General Zia had ignored similar requests to commute death sentences in 400 similar cases. ‘An innocent man does not plead for mercy’, Bhutto wrote.⁴³

Twenty one months after he had become Prime Minister Ali Bhutto was dead. Kissinger got ‘the horrible example’ that he had annouced beforehand. To prevent unrest in the country, Bhutto's top supporters were quickly jailed. Schools and universities were closed. The Army was ready to open fire at demonstrators. The people of Pakistan were just as powerless to voice dissent to the military regime as the people of Indonesia were incapable of rising up against the militairy traitors, who had taken over power in 1965 with direct aid from Washington. But the day will come, that the people of Indonesia and Pakistan will know, that the traitors of Sukarno and Bhutto were recruited by the cia among local military men. But ultimately the super war criminals were the crazy commie hunters in the top echelons of the invisible government in Washington.

43 Ali Bhutto, From my Death Cell, Orient Paperbacks, New Delhi, 1980, p.p. 245.

[p. 58]

Nkrumah

Ghana became independent on March 6, 1957. Kwame Nkrumah (1909-1972) was the first head of state. He, too, joined the ranks of the nonaligned movement founded in 1955 by Sukarno in Bandung. Washington looked at the neutral nations with suspicion and hostility. Many us lawmakers considered these Afro-Asians Communists in disguise. For the invisibles Nehru, Nasser, Sukarno, Sihanouk, Bhutto and Nkrumah were leftist rabble-rousers, that could not be trusted. The more of these shady characters could be put out of business, the better off the free world would be. Never mind free elections or human rights. Fascists military dictators are much to be preferred over wishy washy leftists or fellow travelling Marxists, the idiotic professional spies reasoned.

On February 26, 1966, General J.A. Ankrah announced a coup. A National Liberation Council had been formed. The Convention Peoples Party had been suspended. Nkrumah was out. Ghanian Daniel Amihia told the bbc that he had masterminded the coup and, he boasted, that he had been trained by the cia.

President Nkrumah was at that moment with 22 man delegation in Hanoi and Peking. He wanted to quickly return to Africa, but landed March 2, at Conakry, capital of neighbouring Guinée because of threats to his life in Accra. President Sekoué Touré organised a mass rally in sports arena and declared that Nkrumah had become also head-of-state of Guinée.

In his book Dark Days in Ghana Nkrumah wrote: ‘It has been one of the tasks of the cia and other similar organisations to discover potential Quislings and traitors in our midst, and encourage them by bribery and the promise of political power, to destroy the constitutional government of their countries.

[p. 59]

The us Embassy and the embassies of Britain and West-Germany were implicated in the overthrow of my Government.’⁴⁴ us Ambassador Franklin Williams made 13 million dollars available, including payment for three hired hands who were prepared to kill the President, if he dared to return to Accra.

The former President apparently opened some Intelligence files when writing his book. He identified a number of cia activities in his region. In 1966, an attaché of the us Embassy in Somalia with the rank of colonel had approached Army officers and organised to deliver arms to them to arrange for a coup. In 1965, an attaché of the us Embassy in Cairo. Taylor Odell, was caught red-handed receiving confidential documents from an Egyptian cia agent, Mustafa Amin. Odell was expelled.

In south Sudan, the so-called Azana Liberation Front was founded with cia funds, the purpose being to promote the separation of the south from the rest of the country and declare Azana independent. Also, between 1961 and 1964, the cia murdered a number of politicians in Burundi, the last of them was Prime Minister Pierre Ngendandumwe. He was killed by an employee of the us Embassy, Gonzalve Muyenzi. In his apartment millions of cia money were found. The cia was deeply involved in a coup in Tanzania in 1964. Nkrumah wrote, that an entire book could be filled with proof of cia involvement in Africa alone. He compiled a partial list:

Senegal, December 17, 1962: attempt to overthrow President éeopold Sédar Senghor. Failed.

Togo, January 13, 1963: assassination of President Sylvanus Olympio.

Congo-Brazaville, August 12, 1963: forced resignation of President Abbé Fulbert Youlou.

Dahomey, October 19, 1963: President Hubert Maga deposed.

44 Kwame Nkrumah, Dark Days in Ghana, International Publishers, New York, 1986, p.p. 49.

[p. 60]

Niamey, December 3, 1963: military mutiny suppressed by president Hamani Diori.

Tanzania, Uganda, Kenya, 20, 23, 24 January 1964: military mutinies suppressed with the aid of British troops.

Gabon, February 18, 1964: President Leon M'ba deposed.

Algeria, June 18, 1965: President Ben Bella overthrown.

Congo, November 25, 1965: General Mobutu assumes presidential powers.

Dahomey, December 22, 1965: General Soglo assumes power. Dahomey is plagued by a series of military coups.

Central African Republic, January 1, 1965: President David Dacko is forced to resign.

Nigeria, January 15, 1966: General Aguiyi-Ironsi takes power. A federal prime-minister and two regional premiers are killed.

Ghana, February 24, 1966: military coup as discussed above.

Nigeria, July 28, 1966: General Ironsi assassinated. General Yakubu Gowon takes over.

Burundi, November 29, 1966: King Ntara v deposed.

Togo, January 13, 1967: President Nicolas Grunitzky deposed. Lieutenant-colonel Gnassingbe Eyadema takes over.

Sierra Leone, March 24, 1967: Army takes power of the government.

Nkrumah stressed in his book, that ten of the 38 independent states of Africa established military regimes as the result of coups. He did not relate each and every coup directly to the cia, but he wrote nevertheless: ‘The activities of the cia no longer surprise us. We have experienced many examples of the work of this organisation in recent years. (...) We know both the strength and the limitations of imperialist intelligence organisations. While being responsible for a great deal of unrest in Africa in recent years, they have not been as suc-

[p. 61]

cessful as many would have us believe. This is partly, because they haven been frequently outwitted by the superior techniques and organisation of certain counter-intelligence services. As I write here in Conakry, I have just learned that five cia experts have arrived in Liberia to find out how I manage to communicate with my supporters inside Ghana.’

President Nkrumah also relayed an incident, during which us Secretary of State, Dean Rusk, in June 1966 told a meeting of us business leaders, that President Sukarno, President Ben Bella and Nkrumah's own downfall would be followed by the overthrow of more leftwing world leaders. ‘He started to name them,’ the author reported, ‘but thought better of it, and ended his predictions with an enigmatic smile.’⁴⁵

Richard Nixon represented the us at the independence ceremony. ‘Kwame Nkrumah had been educated at the Lincoln University and the University of Pennsylvania’, he wrote in 1982 in his book Leaders⁴⁶. Nixon continued: ‘I had not reckoned with the extent to which Nkrumah would prove such a genius. In fact, at that time, I found him very impressive both in demeanour and in what he said. Nkrumah professed a deep admiration for American democracy and all that it had achieved.’ Nixon presented him with a technical library as a gift.

Nkrumah developed a vision for a United States of Africa, a torch recently taken up by Muammar el-Qaddafi of Lybia. In the mid-60s the price of cocoa - Ghana's principal export - collapsed. The economy ran into trouble. Nixon, and no doubt the invisible government in Washington, quickly changed their minds about the first President of Ghana. He did not run to Washington for help, and supported the newly established Organization for African Unity in Addis Abeba instead. He also supported other liberation movements in Africa and became a close friend of Guinea's Sekoué Touré.

Nixon writes how Touré came to the us in 1960 and how he

45 Kwame Nkrumah, Dark Days in Ghana, International Publishers, New York, 1986, p.p. 50-51.

46 Richard Nixon, Leaders, Warner Books, New York, 1982.

[p. 62]

came across to the then vice-president as ‘a warm and charming man.’ Nevertheless, Tricky Dick changed his mind about Touré likewise, and noted he was anyway a Marxist, with the predictable bad result for his country Guinea. Nixon describes Nkrumah as becoming anti-Western, paranoid and promoting militant pan-Africanism. He then proceeds in one breath to draw a comparison with Sukarno.

‘When I first saw him in 1953, he spent most of our meeting talking not about the awesome problems on his own country, but about his territorial designs on Dutch New Guinea - or West-Irian, as the Indonesians call it. I was not surprised Sukarno's obsession with Irian was legendary. In Canberra, just a few days earlier, Prime Minister Robert Menzies had warned me to expect a lecture on the subject.’⁴⁷ Nixon portrays Nkrumah and Sukarno ten years after his own Watergate debacle as leaders who were not knowing what they were doing. What the former President of the us demonstrated was never to have understood the essence of the New-Guinea issue being the last province of the former Netherlands East Indies the Dutch had failed to hand-over to Indonesia when sovereignty was finally extended in 1949. It was more than understandable, that Indonesians - including the critics of Sukarno - were united in the desire, that Irian should be liberated from Holland.

Apart from describing Sukarno as someone who had married at least six times, Nixon painted a picture of a leader, who in the end became the victim of a Communist coup in 1965. He followed the official Washington line, while he should have known better having been involved with the cia since the fifties up to the Watergate break-in. Although it sounds incredible, he concluded this passage comparing Sukarno and Nkrumah, by writing, ‘Together they illustrate one of the unfortunate truths about leadership: that those best able to reach the people on an emotional level often have the worst

47 Richard Nixon, Leaders, Warner Books, New York, 1982, p.p. 265.

[p. 63]

programs.’ Poor Nixon seemed to have forgotten, that he promised, running for the White House in 1968, he would end the war in Vietnam. I travelled for one week in New-Hampshire with him, when at each stop he repeated, that Eisenhower had taught him how he ended the war in Korea. He was going to stop the Vietnam conflict. Of course the war dragged on for seven more years. He and Kissinger even broadened it to Laos and Cambodia. It's quite remarkable indeed, that Prince Norodom Sihanouk is not mentioned at all, in this book as if he never existed.

In The us Intelligence Community Jeffrey Richelson established that in 1985 several persons were arrested in Accra working for the cia,⁴⁸ Felix Peasah, a security officer at the us Embassy pleaded guilty. Theodore Atiedu, a police inspector in Ghana's Bureau of National Investigation did the same. Also convicted were Stephen Balfour Ofusu, Chief Superintendent of Police. Who gave government secrets to the cia and arranged taps on telephones of diplomatic missions and highlevel government officials. Another Ghanian, Robert Appiah, a technician with the Post and Telecommunications Corporation was convicted of handing secret keys to a cia officer.

There are no doubt other books on intelligence services arranging the demise of ‘unwanted’ African leaders other than Patrice Lumumba or Kwame Nkrumah, forthcoming. Former State Department official William Blum, has discovered and reported in Rogue State⁴⁹ how it happened, that on August 5, 1962, after Nelson Mandela was on the run for seventeen months from the Pretoria authorities, a car was flagged down near a roadblock outside Howick, Natal with a white man in the back seat and a black driver. The chauffeur was Mandela. The South-African regime had been tipped off by the cia. In 1986 the South-African press reconstructed how a cia officer, Donald C. Rickard, working undercover for the us Consulate in Durban, had tipped off Pretoria. On June 10, 1990, the At-

48 Jeffrey Richelson, The us Intelligence Community, Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1985.

49 William Blum, Rogue State, A Guide to the World's Only Superpower, Common Courage Press, Monroe, Maine, Chapter 23.

[p. 64]

lanta Journal and Constitution reported, that a retired us intelligence officer revealed that within hours of Mandela's arrest a senior cia operative, Paul Eckel, told him: ‘We have turned Mandela over to the South African security branch.’

President George Bush (senior) was asked in 1990, when Mandela was freed by President F.W. de Klerk, after having been locked up for 28 years, whether he would apologize for what the cia had done. His spokesman, Marlin Fitzwater replied: ‘This happened during the Kennedy Administration (...) don't beat me up for what the Kennedy people did.’

Suharto

Four years after he committed high treason and grabbed power in Indonesia, General Suharto gave his version of why he did it in The Smiling General written with German sociologist O.G. Roeder.⁵⁰ This ghostwriter gratuitously dotted down whatever the general told him as if it was the gospel truth, while in fact he was most frequently lying through his teeth's. Roeder also was obviously ignorant about the modus operandi of intelligence services. He seemed to have been unable to protect Suharto from making a fool of himself in this book.

At the start of his reminiscences the general set forth his reasons for committing insubordination versus his commander-in-chief. He had been very unhappy about developments in Indonesia and above all about ‘Sukarno's rising pro-communist policy and comradeship in arms with Peking.’ There was no rising procommunist policy, neither by Sukarno, nor by any of his collaborators or friends. That fictitious rise of Marx and Lenin existed solely and securely in the sick heads of the idiots that made up the invisible government in Washington and that were always at the look out for dupes in foreign lands

50 O.G. Roeder, The Smiling General, Gunung Agung, Jakarta, 1969.

[p. 65]

that could be subverted - mostly for dollars and promises of power to play the filthy games of the cia and the likes.

To begin with, it was the asinine us military policy in Vietnam that had driven Indonesia, Cambodia and even the Philippines into the direction of both Moscow and Peking. Naturally, the Indonesian pki profited from Yankee stupidities on the world scene. This had nothing to do with Sukarno, or Sihanouk or Diosdado Macapagal. Communists and non-communists alike in Southeast Asia unanimously agreed that the us had no business whatsoever to militarily intervene in their region. Who had extended permission to Washington to invade Vietnam? Of course, American presidents had neglected to ask the Security Council of the un to ask approval for their war in S.E.-Asia. China and the ussr would have vetoed it.

Suharto was first of all an Army man, ignorant in political matters, let alone foreign affairs. He never went beyond a lower high school education. He applied for work with the Dutch Navy. All they had available with his qualifications was a job in the kitchen. Suharto's intellectual output was nil. Next, he applied with the knil, the Dutch colonial Army. He rose in the ranks to the top echelon, because he was an excellent marksman, who punctually followed orders. But, he was also an ambitious chap and wanted more. That was the moment that the Washington invisibles infiltrated the kostrad (Army's Strategic Command) headquarters, where he was boss and began to work on a possible Army coup from there. The man was, unlike Sukarno, also an illiterate on the subject of us intelligence services and therefore an ideal target.

When I returned a year after the 1965 coup to Jakarta, I discovered Colonel Sutikno Lukitodisastro to be Suharto's righthand man. I already knew Sutikno in 1957 when he was still a Major and serving with the Garuda i Battalion in Gaza and Egypt under the un flag. Since I lived in New York and Sutikno in the early 60s became military attaché in Washington, we re-

[p. 66]

newed our contacts. I knew him as a Sukarnist. Although I was aware that it was customary for the cia to recruit possible troublemakers from among the military attaché's accredited in the American capital, it never occurred to me Sutikno could have been selected for the job of us babysitter of Suharto. But, in October 1966 I discovered on the spot in Jakarta how unusually close the two men were.

After I left Indonesia in 1957, I was black-listed in Jakarta at the request of the Dutch Government, that was opposed to my critical articles about counter-productive policies by the Hague vis à vis Indonesia. It was Colonel Sutikno who arranged the lifting of restrictions of my reporting on post coup developments. I arrived back in Jakarta October 1, 1966 with a Dutch television team. Again like in 1957, I gained easy access to the palace. The President received each morning guests for tea and breakfast at the backside terrace of the Istana Merdeka (freedom palace). One of his aides would pick me up by jeep at my hotel. These informal gatherings were very informative from a journalist' point of view.

Unexpectedly I became involved in the ongoing wayang (Indonesian shadow play) between the President and his treacherous coup general. To begin with, when I returned to Indonesia in 1966, I had not yet realized to what extend Suharto had already taken over the reins of government. During the ten years I had followed that country's developments Sukarno had been the undisputed leader. He introduced me to the rebellious general as if he was still an insubordinate officer. Suharto greeted me with the typical Javanese attitude of civility towards visitors coupled to his notoriously bogus smile. I blindly bought these public signs of mutual respect between the President and his top military man and was fooled all the way. Sukarno's position had fundamentally changed, which took me time to discover as an entirely new reality in Indonesia.

[p. 67]

Colonel Sutikno was aware of the fact, that President Sukarno asked me daily to stay on after the other breakfast guests had left, so we could talk alone. I became privy to a multitude of Sukarno's views on the situation in the country one year after the coup. Colonel Sutikno approached me, surely with Suharto's consent. The main point of friction between the President and the general was Sukarno's steadfast refusal to condemn the pki for having been the cause of the 1965 military coup. Suharto's aide asked me in a roundabout way, if perhaps I could broach this hot potato during our next conversation and make a strenuous effort to convince him to give in on the pki matter to Suharto. I knew for sure, since the President had made this crystal clear, that he was totally convinced, that the pki was definitely not involved in the 1965 coup. Perhaps some communists had taken part in it, but the party had nothing to do with it. Washington and the cia accused the communists of having killed the generals, in order to give Suharto and his butcher teams an alibi to start a nationwide sweep on members of the pki and Sukarno supporters. President Sukarno considered the cia and Washington the guilty parties, as the us had continuously interfered since Indonesian Independence in the internal affairs of his nation. He was particularly indignant of some of his own military, who refused to recognize these facts. He was at a loss that some officers like Suharto, allowed themselves to act as traitors and turn themselves into easy tools of the enemies of Indonesia.

Nevertheless, I had a shot at it. I argued Suharto's case. Sukarno presented me with a flood of additional information and proof. He mentioned ambassador Marshall Green as an obvious guilty activist against him, who avoided meeting him and who was constantly travelling to Washington, quite unusual for someone whose office was in Jakarta. The President admonished me to do a better job of looking deeper into the role of the cia in all of this. I went to see Marshall Green and

[p. 68]

confronted him to his face with the us once more intervening in Indonesia causing a bloody confrontation among Indonesians who had co-existed with the pki which now, at Washington's urging, was being wiped out in a full-scale civil war causing the biggest bloodbath in Indonesia's history.

Forty years ago human rights and the subject of war criminals were not yet in vogue. Those sudden us standards of decency only became popular at Washington urgency after the Soviet empire disappeared. Prior to that epochmaking event, lives of Communists and leftists were to be wasted by any method including mass extermination. Sometimes, during weekends when the President would helicopter to Bogor in the mountains, where he lived in a four room bungalow on the grounds of the former stately colonial summer palace, we continued our conversations there over dinner. I had accused ambassador Green, that by avoiding the President so openly he risked becoming even more suspect of conspiring with the coup generals then he was mistrusted already. Why did he never attend the palace breakfast meetings as ambassadors from other countries were doing? ‘Who invites whom?’ had been his reply. In Bogor Sukarno asked me, ‘Why should I invite him? Green is subversive anyway.’ Colonel Sutikno, however, kept bringing up the subject of the pki and this point of contention between the President and Suharto. I told him ‘why don't you talk to him yourself?’ Again, it was the question of who invites whom to the palace? I suggested to President Sukarno to have Sutikno over. A presidential military aide went to fetch him and half way through the usual breakfast meeting on October 11, 1966, the President invited both the Colonel and me to walk inside the palace and talk alone, which was to become a 45 minute meeting.⁵¹

Here was the man, who pointedly served as liaison between the evil forces in Washington and Suharto, delivering a message in roundabout ways in order not to sound harsh or dis-

51 Wllem Oltmans, Den Vaderland Getrouwe, Bruna, Utrecht, 1973, p.p. 316-319.

[p. 69]

respectful, but actually presenting an ultimatum, that if the President intended to retain his job, he should still condemn the pki for having killed the six generals, which in turn led to the military coup of 1965. The President listened patiently to the Colonel. I sat in, awestruck by the fact that two friends of mine were battling it out, one of them was talking the language of traitors, and the other was fully aware of the truth and abided his time to hit back.

First Sukarno asked Sutikno calmly: ‘What makes you think I intend to hold on to the presidency at any price?’ I knew he was not prepared to barter his self-esteem for anything in the world, not the presidency of Indonesia either. But I also knew, that his enemies were ruthless, and that in refusing to answer their call, he would forfeit his personal safety and protection. I suspected, he was aware of that as well and was ready to pay any price to retain his self-respect, even if it cost him his life. Finally he lashed out at Sutikno in concise and clear terms indicating he knew who the traitors were and who were guilty, Washington and the cia and not the pki. I saw the Colonel slowly lowering his head in shame before his President and tears came to his eyes. Furthermore, the President seemed fully cognisant of the fact, that if he were to answer the call of the coup officers, the bloodbath among opponents to the military dictatorship, would only grow exponentially. Sutikno drove me back in his jeep to ‘Hotel Indonesia’ and felt it had been an excellent meeting: ‘The President will think now about our conversation and take the right decision,’ he told me. I was aware his optimism was totally unfounded. I had come to know Sukarno's mind. He would never bow to traitors, even if it were to mean death for him.

And that was how it was going to end. Sukarno, hero of Indonesian Independence, would become another victim of Murder Incorporated in Washington. Just as another mysterious messenger, Mr. Ujeng Suwargana had already announced

[p. 70]

in 1962, the murder was to be carried out exactly as announced beforehand. President Sukarno would be isolated and be killed as a flower, that receives no water. The real killers of millions of innocent people in Afro-Asian nations never lost any sleep over their war crimes. The murderers in this holocaust of leftists were never ever even identified, let alone being arrested or forcibly being brought to a War Crimes Tribunal.

Examined closely and objectively, all us presidents, from Eisenhower onwards, qualify as first class war criminals, if they were to be judged by the same standards as some Serb leaders are being brought to trial for. Harry Truman was the only and last President who got the un Security Council to approve the war in Korea. After Truman all us presidents ignored the Charter of the un and a required Security Council resolution when it suited their power games, their illegal invasions and covert operations versus sovereign un member states. As a matter of fact, all nato responsible statesmen acted in 1999 as fully fledged war criminals, when they went along with Washington and London to invade the Balkan and bomb the former Yugoslavia.

When Mussolini invaded Abyssinia in 1935 he violated Italy's membership of the League of Nations in Geneva, which was the beginning of the end of the first world organisation. What Eisenhower, jfk, lbj, Nixon and Ford did in Southeast Asia - for which the brothers Diem were assassinated with the connivance of jfk, Sihanouk was exiled for 25 years from his kingdom with the connivance of Nixon and Kissinger, and Sukarno was betrayed and pestered to death with the connivance of lbj - was in essence classic fascist behaviour. When one member of the un no longer observes the agreed and signed up principles of international law and gets away with it like Washington did, the fences are permanently down. Like the League of Nations in the thirties, the United-Nations actually has ceased to exist as the legal enforcer of internation-

[p. 71]

ally accepted rules. Washington, unlike what Mussolini did in Ethiopia, never physically occupied Indonesia. Instead, the us installed in 1965 a puppet regime in Jakarta, with Suharto in charge, replacing the father of the nation, who was strongly opposed playing ball with America' s imperialist designs.

Instead, Suharto went willingly along with Washington's Dictates. In exchange he was royally rewarded for his smooth cooperation. The West was financing the fascist military regime in Indonesia and looked the other way as their chosen Quisling was stealing himself and his family, in close cooperation with their cronies, filthy rich. Politically, economically and militarily the fourth largest nation in the world was efficiently turned into a us protectorate for no less than an uninterrupted 32 years.

Of course, Suharto can count on the eternal gratitude of Washington and cannot be brought to The Hague to be held accountable for the murdering of hundreds of thousands of people. The same goes for fellow war criminals like Augusto Pinochet, for Belgians involved in hacking Lumumba to pieces, Americans and Cubans, who intended to shoot or poison Castro, nor will these standards be applied to the thousands of Americans who committed the most bloody war crimes on all continents of the world. They have become the fascist untouchables of the 21st century and cannot be brought to justice in contrast to their unfortunate Yugoslavian brethren. The White House, the cia and the invisible government protect them, because mass slaughter of leftists and communists is considered a patriotic American duty. Those who are considered leftist, communist or terrorist fall into Washington's category of humans to be wasted and thrown out.

[p. 72]

Qaddafi

William Blum left the State Department in 1967 abandoning his aspiration of becoming a diplomat, because he opposed the war in Vietnam. He became a researcher of illegal us behaviour worldwide. In Rogue State he wrote that beginning in 1945, Washington had attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments and attempted to crush some 30 populist-nationalist movements struggling against intolerable regimes. ‘In the process’, he noted, ‘the us caused the end of life of several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair.’

Blum listed the following terrorist us interventions worldwide:

China	1945-1951
France	1947
Marshall Islands	1946-1958
Greece	1947-1949
Italy	1947-1949
The Philippines	1945-1953
Korea	1945-1953
Eastern Europe	1948-1956
Germany	1950s
Iran	1953
Guatemala	1953-1990s
Costa Rica	mid 195Os and 1970-1971
Middle East	1956-1958
Indonesia	1957-1958
Haïti	1959
Western Europe	1950s-1960s
Guyana	1953-1964
Iraq	1959-1973

[p. 73]

ussr	1940s-1960s
Vietnam	1945-1973
Cambodia	1955-1973
Laos	1957-1973
Thailand	1965-1973
Ecuador	1950-1963
The Congo	1960-1965; 1977-1978
Algeria	1960s
Brasil	1961-1964
Peru	1965
Dominican Republic	1963-1965
Cuba	1959-2001
Indonesia	1965
Ghana	1966
Uruguay	1969-1972
Chili	1964-1973
Greece	1964-1974
South Africa	1960s; 1980s
Bolivia	1964-1975
Australia	1972-1975
Iraq	1972-1975
East-Timor	1970s-1990s
Angola	1976-1980s
Jamaica	1976
Honduras	1980s
Philippines	1970s-1990S
Seychelles	1979-1981
South-Yemen	1979-1984
South-Korea	1980
Chad	1981-1982
Grenada	1979-1983
Surinam	1982-1984
Libya	1981-1989
Fiji	1987

[p. 74]

Panama	1989
Afghanistan	1979-1992
El Salvador	1980-1992
Haïti	1987-1994
Bulgaria	1990-1991
Somalia	1993
Iraq	1990s-2001
Peru	1990s till 2001
Mexico	1990s till 2001
Yugoslavia	1995 till 2001

In his Guide to the world's only super rogue power Blum produced this list covering about the same period I myself was active in international journalism. A number of us interventions and covert operations I recalled from my own reporting, like the many sessions of the Security Council, I covered at un headquarters. But then there were numerous covert interventions by the invisibles in Washington, that were never dealt with in the United-Nations, because they were top secret and impossible to prove who initiated them. Too often Washington literally got away with murder. Blum observed that countries that agreed with the American lexicon of what democracy should stand for can count on aid, in dollars and in weapons, and they will be considered allies. But, doomed are parties or leaders, that cherish different standards and hold other ideals than those accepted by Washington. Those, disagreeing with the us, are up for grabs, because they are looked upon as enemies. Blum's observations are identical to my own gathered during 50 years of practicing journalism.

‘For secret assassinations the contrived accident is the most effective technique. When successfully executed, it causes little excitement and is only casually investigated.’ Blum quoted from us spy manuals. ‘The most efficient accident is a fall of 75 feet or more on a hard surface. Elevator shafts, stair

[p. 75]

wells, unscreened windows and bridges will serve.’ The us advice continued, ‘The act maybe executed by sudden, vigorous grabbing of the ankles, tipping the subject over the edge. If the assassin immediately sets up an outcry playing the “horrified witness”, no alibi or surreptitious withdrawl is necessary’. Blum quoted various examples from us spy manuals. cia guidelines to Contras, who were fighting the Sandinista Government in Nicaragua included, ‘Kidnap all officials or agents of the government and place them in public places. Shame, ridicule and humiliate the personal symbols of the government (...) If a guerrilla fires at an individual, make the town see that it was the repressive system of the Sandinista regime, that really killed the informer, and that the weapon fired was one recovered in combat against the regime. It is possible to neutralize carefully selected and planned targets, such as court judges, justices of the peace, police and state security officials, Sandinista defense committee chiefs etcetera.’ cia guidelines clearly encourage plain murder. What, perhaps, is the most frightening about these instructions sanctioned by the White House and all top levels of government is, that Americans are accepting these rules as normal and acceptable in dealing with presumed enemies. It is the us mind-set that goes back to the traditions of the American Wild West and Wild Bill Donovan who remains the father of the us worldwide secret murder business.

‘If possible’, says a cia instruction book, ‘professional criminals will be hired to carry out specific jobs.’ Like shooting Sukarno, hacking Lumumba to pieces, or poisoning Castro to name a few of those jobs from the past. ‘Tasks will be assigned to others, in order to create a “martyr” for the cause,’ agents destined for Nicaragua were told. ‘Take demonstrators to a confrontation with Sandinista authorities, in order to bring about uprisings and shootings, which will cause the death of one or more persons, who could become the martyrs, a situa-

[p. 76]

tion, that should be made use of immediately against the regime, in order to create greater conflicts,’ as quoted by William Blum in Rogue State.

Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya has for a long time been a favourite target of us cia and Mafia gangsters. With the exception of the Jimmy Carter Administration, when brother Billy Carter built a special relationship with the Libyan leader, Qaddafi is on the most wanted list of the Wild Bill Donovan boys. That in Washington terms means, anything goes, sending bombers or dozens of warships, get the guy is the password. Again it is the David versus Goliath option, because Yankees are sufficiently cowardly inclined to preferably pick on blasting and invading the smallest of nations, like the island of Grenada, Panama, Cuba, Iraq, Vietnam, Korea, or Kosovo, places hard to find on the map. Plans for military actions against China or Russia are considerably more carefully analysed. Libya is a desert nation of 1.759.540 square kilometers. In 1973 there were 2.257.037 people living there, which turned the former kingdom into an ideal testing ground for us military might. The country was a former Italian colony. us and British military bases were allowed to remain there after World War II.

Finally, September 1, 1969, Colonel Qaddafi ousted King Mohammed Idris and took power on behalf of the people. No more us and British war games in Lybia. This caused much resentment in Washington and London. Qaddafi was registered with the intelligence Mafia as a nuisance and a troublemaker. Hence, several us heads-of-state approved attempts to kill him, even if large scale air- and sea operations were needed to achieve this goal. Washington lives by the weird notion, that the us alone should be the judge of what is acceptable to the entire world and who should he rooted out as unwanted. Qaddafi never made the Washington grade.

Bob Woodward, assistant managing editor of the Washington

[p. 77]

Post published Veil: The Secret Wars of the cia, 1981-1987.⁵² Those days Ronald Reagan occupied the White House, and William Casey was cia director. Hot spots, then, were Nicaragua, Iran and Libya. Casey supported President Hissen Habré of Chad, the former French colony south of Libya. ‘Habrà came to power with cia paramilitary assistance as part of one of the early Reagan Administration findings to bloody Qaddafi's nose, noted Woodward. Sudan President Gaafar Mohammed Nimeri was likewise coveted as a close us ally to further box in Qaddafi. Simultaneously the deputy chief of Liberian President Samuel Doe's personal guard, Lieutenant Colonel Moses Flanzamaton was a cia agent. The Colonel launched a machinegun ambush on Joe's jeep. But the President escaped unharmed. Flanzamaton was captured, confessed to cia sponsorship of the coup attempt and was executed.⁵³

Woodward discovered, that Casey on the third day he became cia director, had received a twelve page Secret snie (Special National Intelligence Estimate) on Libya. That document turned Qaddafi into one of Casey's top priorities. The ussr was selling Libya arms at a rate of a billion dollars a year. According to cia shrinks, special circumstances in his youth contributed to exaggerated forms of Bedouin characteristics like naïve idealism, religious fanaticism, intense pride, austerity, xenophobia, and sensitivity to slight. Woodward ridiculed Freudian spy craft and armchair psychoanalysis by cia doctors. But the net result of all this dangerous cia nonsense was, that the Reagan White House considered Qaddafi in 1985 the most dangerous terrorist in the world. He was ready to provide money, weapons, etcetera to some 30 insurgent, radical or terrorist groups.

Woodward reconstructed from his research some juicy details of what kind of simpleton Casey actually was. He had been told, for instance, that Qaddafi acted strangely when meeting Yemeni officials. Casey suspected the Libyan leader to be on

52 Bob Woodward, Veil: The Secret Wars of the cia 1981-1987, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1987.

53 Bob Woodward, Veil: The Secret Wars of the cia 1981-1987, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1987, p.p. 310-311.

[p. 78]

the brink of a nervous breakdown. The cia arranged for us warplanes to fly close to the Libyan coast, in the cia director's words, ‘to humiliate Qaddafi.’ Woodward: ‘It was summer, there was comparatively little to do. Qaddafi could be Reagan's victory.’ Reagan had signed on April 30, 1985 National Security Directive (nsdd) No. 168, a six-page secret order. Libya was secretly spied upon, since Qaddafi was considered a monster, ready to set the world afire. He was buying mig 29s and t 32 tanks from the ussr and concluded an arms deal with Greece worth 500 million dollars. ‘Flower’ was the top codename for covert actions against Libya. ‘Rose’ the code name for a pre-emptive military strike against Libya.

Woodward: ‘Bill Casey (cia) and George Shultz (State Department) were determined to finish what had been started in Libya. The cia gave wide circulation to intelligence on the seven main residences that Qaddafi used perhaps hoping it would leak to the Colonel to remind him he was being watched.’⁵⁴ There was no crisis, but the Planning Group met on August 7, 1986 in the White House situation room to investigate if something could be done anyway to damage Libya. There were some strategic problems, because President Francois Mitterand did not want us bombers to fly over France on a bombing raid on Tripoli. On August 14, 1986, ready to strike, the top met again at the White House and were joined by Reagan himself. During the discussion how to eliminate the Libyan leader, Woodward detected in the minutes of the conversation a typical gem to illustrate how the minds in the White House ticked. Reagan: ‘Why not invite Qaddafi to San Francisco, he likes to dress up so much.’ Where-upon the Secretary of State, Shultz, observed ‘Why don't we give him aids?’ These are the people who want the world to be like them.

On April 14, 1986, under the codename ‘Prairie Fire’, 200 American bombers appeared over the Gulf of Sidra and Tripoli and Bengazi were bombed. This was done in retaliation for a

54 Bob Woodward, Veil: The Secret Wars of the cia 1981-1987, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1987, p.p. 471.

[p. 79]

bomb attack on a discotheque ‘La Belle’ in West-Berlin, where two us soldiers had died. Reagan read on television three Libyan messages intercepted by the National Security Agency (nsa) on television. They contained ‘irrefutable proof’, the President said, that Libya was guilty of the Berlin blast. The bombers were accompanied to further humiliate Qaddafi, with an armada of 45 us Navy vessels. Eight bombers had been selected to hit ‘Splendid Gate’, the barracks of the President with 2.000 pound laserguided bombs. Qaddafi escaped injury. Two of his sons were wounded, and a fifteen-month old girl, described as an adopted daughter, was killed. Reagan went again on television and said, ‘Today we did what we had to do. If necessary, we shall do it again.’⁵⁵ Rereading these us war crimes against Libya in the 80s, one realizes that by today's standards the entire top of the Reagan White House qualifies to be issued one-way tickets to the War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague. Noam Chomsky described this us mentality, that Washington knows best what is ‘good for the world’ as follows: ‘Contempt for the rule of law is deeply rooted in us practice and intellectual culture’.⁵⁶

And, indeed, it is not the cancellation by Bush junior of the Kyoto Treaty, the abolition of the abm Treaty with Moscow, or the unwillingness to stick to a biological weapons convention adopted by 143 nations, which isolates the us ever further from the rest of mankind. Washington has never really played ball in good faith. As Chomsky reminds us in his book, when the World Court in The Hague condemned the us in 1986 for ‘unlawful use of force’ against Nicaragua - like surrounding that nation with mines, that Soviet ships could not bring in fresh supplies - Washington ignored the judgement and refused to recognize the Court's jurisdiction. The bastards in Washington called their arms shipments to the fascist Contras in Nicaragua ‘humanitarian aid’. Therefore, it was said in Washington, the World Court did not know what it was talk-

55 Bob Woodward, Veil: The Secret Wars of the cia 1981-1987, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1987, p.p. 446.

56 Noam Chomsky, Rogue States, The Rule of Force in World Affairs, Southern Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2000.

[p. 80]

ing about when it ordered the us to pay extensive reparations to the Sandinista government.

Next, the Security Council of the United Nations accepted a resolution calling on all states to respect international law, which meant in 1986 to please leave Nicaragua and the Sandinista's alone. But, of course, the us busy with a world wide anti-communist crusade, vetoed the resolution and got one fellow un member to support them, as usual Israël. In other words Washington is quite accustomed to going it alone although Bush II is aggravating this solo-ride to entirely new levels of isolation evoking memories of the 1823 Monroe Doctrine. At the time, President James Monroe aimed at numbering North and South America exclusively to a new concept of us Lebensraum. Bush II seems to entertain the wild delusion, that the entire globe must rightfully be considered of strategic imperative interest to Washington. Yes, nations are allowed to run their own affairs but if they entertain different ideas of what is best for them, they are on a collision course with the Wild Bill Donovan boys and can reckon on a stiff blockade to call them to order. And, if that doesn't help, the Yankee fleet win appear before the coast, cruise-missiles are being fired or, if need be, the bombers will fly out with their laser-guided explosives on board. Ask Qaddafi, he has had plenty of experience and a belly full of us Rogue Terrorism.

Pinochet

Worldwide ignorance about the true nature of the Rogue tentacles of the United States reaching out to all continents, including Monroe's Latin paradise, is profoundly shocking. Having been a resident of New York City from 1958-1992 I can testify to the fact that most Americans themselves have no

[p. 81]

clue as to what their Government and their intelligence services are capable off. Chomsky raised indirectly in What Uncle Sam Really Wants⁵⁷ the subject of globalisation: ‘The International Monetary Fund (imf) is a more cost-effective instrument than the Marines and the cia if it can do the job. But the “iron fist” must be poised in the background, available when needed,’ he wrote. Professor Chomsky referred to the installation of cia puppets like, Suharto, Mobutu and Pinochet as a United States ‘rent-a-thug’ policy.⁵⁸

Chomsky: ‘The us has pursued these ends largely through the Pentagon system. (...) We are now locked into these devices for maintaining electronics, computers and our hightech industry generally. (...) The transfer of resources to wealthy minorities and other government policies led to a vast wave of financial manipulations and a consumption binge. But there was little in the way of productive investment, and the country was saddled with huge debts: government, corporate, household and the incalculable debt of unmet social needs as society drifts towards a Third World pattern, with islands of great wealth and privilege in a sea of misery and suffering.’

Professor Chomsky explained, that when a superpower like the us becomes entangled in these policies, it must also find ways to divert the population from seeing what is actually happening. Standard procedure is to frighten them with images of terrible enemies everywhere. With the evil of the Soviet empire fallen apart, the Clinton's and Bush'es are saving Americans from mortal dangers looming elsewhere. The Qaddafi's and mysterious terrorists like Osama bin Laden serve as deterrent dangers. Thanks to the courage of Bill Clinton, who fired missiles at Sudan and Afghanistan, dangers of terrorism at home could be kept away from America's sacred home land. Saddam Hussein is already serving for a decade as an imminent danger to the West. The media in the West are painting nightmare scenarios about Saddam's nuclear or biological

57 Noam Chomsky, What Uncle Sam Really Wants, Odonian Press, 1997.

58 Noam Chomsky, What Uncle Sam Really Wants, Odonian Press, 1997, p.p. 76.

[p. 82]

warfare capabilities to justify the continuation of illegal acts of war by ultramodern us and British war planes over Iraq. The Rogue record of the Secret Team, the cia and the invisible government in general grows steadily. Who dropped the first nuclear devices over densely populated Japanese cities? Who first launched chemical warfare in Southeast Asia?

President Salvador Allende Gossens, a Marxist physician became President of Chili on September 4, 1970, when the Chilean Congress voted him 153 to 35 into power. He became the first president elected in Monroe Doctrine territory on a Marxist-Leninist platform. Washington was in an uproar. The Donovan boys were doing overtime. Fidel was one thing, but a freely elected communist was taboo. Allende began to implement his program, but discovered the cost of living rose 160 percent in two years. Yet, during legislative elections in 1973, Allende's coalition won more seats in both houses. That did it. Washington decided, he had to go. The military took over in September 1973, Allende was killed. Augusto Pinochet Ugarte was chosen chairman of a four-member junta. The 1925 Constitution was suspended and political parties were banned. The cia scenario for military intervention was introduced. Mass arrests followed. Washington was asked for assistance to set up concentration camps, just like in Indonesia in 1965, when General Suharto asked and received us assistance to set up an entire island, by the name of Burn, which became one huge prison for more than 100.000 Indonesians who were opposed to the cia installed fascist dictatorship.

Allende had already in 1972 delivered a speech to the United Nations in which he accused the International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation (itt) of having driven its rogue tentacles deep into the Chilean economy and was trying its utmost to disrupt the country. The President went as far as to warn that the itt was promoting civil war. British author Anthony Sampson published in 1973, The Sovereign State, The Secret His-

[p. 83]

tory of ITT.⁵⁹ In his 288 page report, Sampson detailed the close cooperation between itt and the cia. It's an aspect grossly overlooked when opposition is being organised against globalisation. itt was hardly the sole multinational misused by cia gangsters and the Donovan boys.

In particular, the British writer researched the role of the then Czar of criminal manipulations in Washington, Henry Kissinger, the latter-day Nobel Prize winner. This crook headed at the time the super secret Forty Committee. It was an interdepartmental group of invisibles, which had on top of its agenda in those days how to get rid of Allende. How could economic instability in Chili be quickly promoted? How could banks be forced to stop making loans available? How could unions be bribed to cause further troubles for the Marxist President? Companies were urged to drag their feet spending money in Chili. Shipping deliveries of spare parts were intentionally slowed down or halted. Technical assistance to Chili was stopped. The cia advised Kissinger and his co-conspirators that these measures would hasten Allende's fall. Washington was not only promoting civil war in Chili as Allende had warned, Washington was engaged in an illegal fullscale war short of sending warships and bombers.

In Secret Agencies, us Intelligence in a Hostile World, Loch Johnson demonstrated how the Nixon Administration and Kissinger relied heavily on a policy of economic destruction for Chili, and how they organised a truckers strike, that even further disrupted economic life. Another servant of the White House gangsters, us ambassador Edward Korry, forwarded a set of secret cables to his us bosses in which he proudly confirmed, ‘not a nut or a bolt will be allowed to reach Chili under Allende.’⁶⁰

David Wise noted in The American Police State, The Government against the People that the underworld mentality of the Nixon White House was rampant at the time.⁶¹ The cia approved the

59 Anthony Sampson, The Sovereign State, The Secret History of ITT, Hodder & Stoughton, London, 1973.

60 Loch Johnson, Secret Agencies, us Intelligence in a Hostile World, Yale University, 1996.

61 David Wise, The American Police State, The Government against the People, Random House, New York, 1976.

[p. 84]

spending of millions of dollars to unseat the democratically elected Allende. Harold Geneen, the big boss of itt, privately donated another million to hasten the liquidation of the Chilean President. Wise also reconstructed events, that led to the murder of Orlando Letelier in 1976. He was a former Chilean ambassador in Washington, later Allende's Minister of Defense. Pinochet had him arrested. He was brought to Dawson Island. He spent eight gruelling months on the Chilean version of Suharto's concentration camp on Buru island - both cia inventions - before he was released and sought refuge in Washington where he was simply executed in bright daylight driving happily along.

Both Wise and New York Times journalist, Seymour Hersh, discovered a direct link between the Watergate break-in and a similar incident at the Chilean Embassy in Washington followed by Letelier's liquidation. Notorious Watergate burgler, Frank Sturgis, was again involved. ABC television managed May 30, 1975 to get Sturgis to admit on camera to the crime of having broken into the Chilean Embassy. This shady character had once been a trusted security guard of Fidel Castro, was working secretly for the cia. He was back in the cia womb to continue his dirty tricks in the streets of Washington.

Step by step David Wise - whom I interviewed in his study in Santa Barbara, California - reconstructed the depth of what the various loose cia dogs had written into their sordid record of murderous and treacherous deceptions. He found that shortly after President Nixon had ordered, that Salvador Allende should be blocked to become President of Chili, General Rene Schneider, Commander in Chief of the Chilean Army was killed during a kidnap attempt on October 22, 1970. The cia had supplied machine guns and ammunition to a group of Chilean officers. Wise: ‘CIA covert operations, from rigging elections abroad to overthrowing governments and instituting political assassinations should be specifically barred by

[p. 85]

law in peacetime. It has been amply demonstrated by now that the cost of covert operations to our own system is too high.’⁶²

Even journalist Wise came up with the argument that rogue behaviour for a superpower was unacceptable, not because it was unethical, undemocratic, immoral and in violation of international law, but it was too expensive. His advise in 1976 was of course ignored. He gave the wrong reason for an urgent change of us conduct in Foreign Affairs. To radically change the rogue behaviour of Washington decisionmakers, it is necessary to first decode the nonsense out of us brains, that Americans are the chosen people, who have to teach - and if that doesn't work - have to enforce the American way of life on mankind as the ultimate salvation for all.

The self assuredness, the devotion, the passion and the utter vehemence by which Yankees try to spread their liberating gospel to all corners of the globe does indeed recall the fundamental spirit of the crusades, when Christians, for the love of their God, mounted their horses on the way to Constantinople to slit the throats of Muslims. The poor horses were unable to carry them even further East to massacre the Ayatollahs, the Hindus and the Buddhists as well, while Confucius & Co. had wisely blockaded themselves behind the Chinese wall, to keep the boys of Jesus out. But a dozen centuries later, the West seems to be finally infiltrating the lands of the Sung and Ming dynasties, if not by sending spy planes and espionage rockets over the Wall, then by seeding capitalism and super individualism into Chinese minds. Or by bequeathing a stock-exchange on them and introducing Microsoft computers, Internet, deodorant, Coca Cola, blue jeans, Kentucky Fried Chickens, and last but not least invade the former Han empire with Olympic Games at a time when the Chinese Communist Party might have celebrated its 85th birthday.

Deputy cia director Richard Bissell finally admitted before the

62 David Wise, The American Police State, The Government against the People, Random House, New York, 1976., p.p. 409.

[p. 86]

Senate Intelligence Committee chaired by Senator Frank Church, that he never told the Special Group, which was the predecessor of Kissinger's Forty Committee, that the cia had used underworld figures to kill, for instance, Castro. Richard Nixon instructed the cia not to tell the Forty Committee about its covert operations against the Allende Government. Relations between the cia and the Forty Club were in the end reduced to telephone calls. Of course, Kissinger knew exactly what was cooking, including the fact that Nixon freed 10 million dollars to assist in blocking Allende's democratic election. David Wise, after the massive data he alone collected on illegal activities by the intelligence services, called it a myth that covert operations would ever be employed sparingly, only if necessary, and carefully controlled. The taste for secret operations to impose America's will on others, was running wild ever since Donovan designed basic us spy networks. The clock of the us spy genius could not be turned back. It became unstoppable.

Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt, Jr, Chief us Naval Operations wrote a memoir, On Watch.⁶³ He visited President Salvador Allende on February 19, 1971 in the summer palace in Valparaiso. The Admiral wrote: ‘I found him one of the most fascinating men I ever met.’ At the end of the meeting Allende even suggested, that the nuclear powered aircraft carrier Enterprise visiting Rio de Janeiro would stop at Valparaiso on its way back to San-Diego. He would himself very much like to visit the us warship. Zumwalt recalls that everyone was for it, even ambassador Edward Korry. ‘All the Defense people, Tom Moorer, Melvin Laird, Dave Packard agreed (...) but the State Department and the cia were solidly against it and so was Henry Kissinger.’⁶⁴ The Admiral added: ‘Kissinger was in a black rage (...) for me having started the whole thing.’ Zumwalt wrote about Kissinger's ‘bizarre personality’. ‘Henry was altogether capable of flying into a fury for no reason, as indeed his

63 Elmo R. Zumwalt, On Watch, Quadrangle, New York Times Book, p.p. 325.

64 Elmo R. Zumwalt, On Watch, Quadrangle, New York Times Book, p.p. 327.

[p. 87]

principal (Nixon) often was.’ The Admiral, as White House insider, offered a rare glimpse of the two men who got the us entangled in the biggest scandal in American history.

Deputy Attorney General Richard Kleindienst - working for Attorney General John Mitchell, a Nixon confidant, who went to jail for his role in the Watergate disaster - was testifying in 1972 in the Senate about illegal government behaviour, when journalist Jack Anderson broke the news, that itt had cooperated with the cia to make Allende lose the election. Anthony Sampson said in his book, that Anderson had only succeeded, because the relevant documents ‘had escaped shredding.’⁶⁵ The select clique dealing with these Mafia practices in the name of people of the United States included besides Nixon himself, of course Kissinger again, also John McCone, who had shifted from Director of the cia to boss of itt, and an additional host of other mostly invisible lawbreakers in the Washington ruling elite.

People might be aware that the fascist military regime of Pinochet was imposed in secret on Chileans by the top of the Washington power structure, but everyone seems to intentionally ignore, that similar covert operations are taking place every single day all over the world. Americans prefer to remain blind to these unpleasant realities and rather wait for a future muckraker like Anderson, to surface and find new proof that 20, 30, 40 years ago, as some commentators suspected and wrote all along, indeed, for instance, the uck Albanian Liberation Army in Kosovo was a full-scale cia covert operation after all, initiated by the invisible government of 1999, to destabilize the Balkans and to be able to issue in the end a free ride for the last Communist dictator in the region to the War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague.

65 Anthony Sampson, The Sovereign State, The Secret History of ITT, Hodder & Stoughton, London, 1973, p.p. 232.

[p. 88]

Kissinger

lbj, concluding that he was never able to control ‘that Goddamn murder incorporated, the cia’, was succeeded by the walking disaster, Richard Nixon. Travelling in 1968 in New-Hampshire for one week on his plane and, I also got to know some of his associates like Herb Klein (press), Richard Price (speech writer), and Richard Allen, (foreign policy-advisor) who later was appointed Ronald Reagan's first national security advisor, but was forced from his job after he had accepted illegal gifts in Japan.

At the airport in Keene, there was a problem with transportation, because snow had fallen. Nixon, John Chancellor of nbc and I were talking under the wing of the plane, when the future president made an astonishing remark. Referring to the two wars Holland had fought to sabotage Sukarno's efforts of nation-building, Nixon said to me: ‘We should have sent the Marines to assist the Dutch in defeating Sukarno.’⁶⁶ I recalled Nixon's words on welcoming Sukarno in 1956 to Washington likening him to Abraham Lincoln. I realized I had caught a rare first glimpse of what this presidential candidate was really about.

I got in touch with columnist Drew Pearson in Washington, who published October 29, 1968 a syndicated column on this dangerous off hand observation by the candidate for the White House. This article led to an inquiry from the editors of Life magazine, who telephoned me in New York. On November 25, 1968, they published a two-page editorial on Nixon's foreign policy options, in which they warned to be more prudent in making statements about the sending of the Marines anywhere in the world.

Nixon invited Nelson Rockefeller's foreign policy advisor, Henry Kissinger to join him at the White House. While much

66 Willem Oltmans, Den Vaderland Getrouwe, Bruna, Utrecht, 1973, p.p. 356-357.

[p. 89]

is known about the bloody hands of this man, the regular revelations about secret deals and new lies further tarnish his record. He turns out book after book to demonstrate that he sees himself as the greatest statesman Washington ever produced, a twentieth century reincarnation of Otto von Bismarck (1815-1898), the Prussian statesman and first chancellor of the German empire. He might even be quite right. Bismarck established empirical power through a series of wars. In 1878 he also presided over the Congress of Berlin, where decisions were made regarding stability on the Balkans and about the Middle-East following the Russo-Turkish War. Bismarck initiated in 1884 another Conference at which Africa was partitioned. Considering the effect of Bismarck's calls for German greatness it ought to be remembered that all this accumulated power led in a relatively short time, in 1914 and 1938, to two World Wars. Kissinger watchers around the globe view him in retrospect as indeed a first class warmonger, who with his Jewish German background might some day be written up as a first classic German politico made-in-usa.

During a Florida vacation I picked up a January-February 2001 copy of Harpers, one of the last surviving important us monthly's in the us, thanks to editor Lewis Lapham. It contained part one of an article about Henry Kissinger's war crimes. These were the days that the newly arrived Bushites in Washington were screaming for the blood of Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein and others. The report, which now appeared as a book⁶⁷, was written by Washington journalist Christopher Hitchens. At last an authoratative compilation of Kissinger crimes and misdeeds reached the bookshelves, even that of Barnes & Noble.

Hitchens mentioned six principal evil machinations by Henry Kissinger in the introduction of his book:

‘1	The deliberate mass killing of civilians in Indo-China.

67 Christopher Hitchens, The Trial of Henry Kissinger, Verso Publishers, New York, 2001.

[p. 90]

	(Is there any difference with Ho Chi-minh killing us terrorists, Stalin killing Nazi invaders or Milosovic killing Albanian terrorists?)
2	Deliberate collusion in mass murder, and later in assassination in Bangladesh.
3	The personal suborning and planning of murder, of a senior constitutional officer in a democratic nation - Chili - with which the United-States was not at war.
4	Personal involvement in a plan to murder the head-of-state in the democratic nation of Cyprus.
5	The incitement and enabling of genocide in East-Timor.
6	Personal involvement in a plan to kidnap and murder a journalist living in Washington DC’.

Telford Taylor, Chief Counsel at the Nazi's War Crimes Tribunal at Nuremberg, later Law Professor at Columbia University, contemplated the pivotal question: What is a war crime? To simply say that it is a violation of the laws of war might be true, but it is hardly meaningful. War consists largely of acts considered crimes in times of peace. Yugoslavia was attacked by the us and nato without even a declaration of war. That in itself was a war crime and illegal in the absence of a Security Council resolution. nato followed the Mussolini-Hitler dictum: attack, bomb, invade and forget the rules of war and the League of Nations.

At Nuremberg 21 Nazis were condemned to die. In total, by 1948, 3.500 people were indicted for war crimes in Europe and 2.800 in Japan. In 1970 Taylor published Nuremberg and Vietnam, An American Tragedy in which he warned, that us War Crimes in Vietnam ressembled Nazi behaviour in World War II so strong, that Americans could some day be brought before a Nuremberg Tribunal.⁶⁸ On abc television (Dick Cavett Show), professor Taylor suggested, that General William West-

68 Telford Taylor, Nuremberg and Vietnam, An American Tragedy, New York Times Book, Random House, New York, 1970.

[p. 91]

moreland, as commander in Vietnam, could be tried for a wide-range of American War Crimes in Southeast Asia.

Professor Richard Falk of Princeton University recalled in the New York Times magazine of 27 December 1970, that the War Crimes Tribunal organised by British philosopher Bertrand Russell in 1966 was correct in warning that the us was entering the dangerous territory of genocide in Vietnam. Article 2 of the Charter of the on said:

‘All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat of use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.’⁶⁹ When eighteen nato members attacked Belgrado for refusing to give in to a premeditated allied ultimatum, the so-called allies simply behaved like Nazis. Kosovo was a repeat Vietnam performance, again outside the un and now joined in full force by all nato countries.

What has to be taken into account is that the great Yankee Bismarck of the past century has been the fundamental architect of the worldwide acceptance of us criminal behaviour in world affairs. Not only was he awarded a Noble Prize for his unscrupulous and sinister operations. But he has also been regarded as one of the most respectable Foreign Policy figures of the twentieth century. But what was worse, he was lending unwarranted respectability to his malicious conduct of us Foreign Affairs. His phony probity fooled many unsuspecting victims. Recently, when Henry dropped in on the then Indonesian President Abdurachman Wahid to lobby on behalf of us firms, his host became so enchanted with Kissinger's soft words, that he appointed him special advisor on the spot.

Hitchens described how Henry entered the halls of power in 1969 ‘from a mediocre and opportunistic academic to an international potentate to a life of sycophancy and duplicity.’ He continued: ‘Obsessed with Vietnamese intransigence

69 Richard A. Falk, Gabriel Kolko & Robert Jay Lifton, Crimes of War, A legal, political-documentary, and psychological inquiry into the responsibility of leaders, citizens, and soldiers for criminal acts in wars, Random House, New York, 1971.

[p. 92]

Kissinger at one point contemplated using thermonuclear weapons to obliterate the pass through which ran the railway line from North Vietnam to China, and at another stage considered bombing the dikes that prevented North Vietnam's irrigation system from flooding the country.’

General Alexander Haig and his deputy Colonel Ray Sitton mapped the secret bombing of Cambodia. Kissinger oversaw this operation personally. His own collaborators joked at the time: ‘Henry is playing Bismarck again.’ Some of his aides like Anthony Lake and Roger Morris resigned from his staff in protest over what they considered us mass-murder of Asian civilians outside Vietnam as well. Kissinger would inquire if pilots knew where they were bombing, because he was worried that they would hit cia crews operating in enemy territory. As more articles about his war crimes are appearing in the media, the more enraged Henry becomes. To the troubled minds of Nixon and Kissinger, the truth has always been synonymous with treason. When The New York Times decided to print the Pentagon Papers, June 13, 1971, a telephone conversation between these two men became known years later. ‘It is treasonable, there is no question. It's actionable, I am absolutely sure this violates all sorts of security laws,’ Kissinger told his boss.

They arranged for Attorney General John Mitchell to ask the courts to bar further publication. But the us Supreme Court rejected 6 to 3 the presidential request. Anthony Lewis recalled this tragic episode in the The Times, June 9, 2001, and reminded readers of the fact, that Congress in 2000 introduced a bill that would make publication of classified papers a crime. ‘The press paid little attention to the menacing legislation until it had gone through both the House and Senate and been sent to the White House. President Clinton then saved the day by vetoing the legislation.’

In the end, the casualty figures as a result of war crimes by five

[p. 93]

us heads-of-state and their errand boys - of whom Kissinger was the worst - became unacceptably high. They make Milosevic, Karadzic and Mladic look like small time operators. Between March 1969 and May 1970 alone Nixon and Kissinger approved no less than 3.630 secret missions above Cambodia and Laos, with 600.000 dead people in Cambodia and 350.000 in Laos. Sukarno and Sihanouk opposed this massmurder in South East Asia and were promptly removed for their refusal to cooperate with the us war criminals.

The us Senate Subcommittee for Refugees estimated that between 1969 - when Nixon and Kissinger began to run the war - and 1972, three million Asians had been killed. During those four years the us dropped 4.500.000 tons of high explosives on the three countries, that once made up Indo-China. According to the Pentagon the us Air Force dropped about half this load during World War II above Germany. The notorious cia counter-guerrilla ‘Phoenix’ program initiated by this murderous duo in the White House, killed an additional 35.708 Vietnamese civilians in the period 1969-1972.

Chapter 8 of the Hitchens book dealt with East-Timor invaded on December 7, 1975 by the Suharto regime. That day, President Gerald Ford and Henry Kissinger left Jakarta after an official visit to the fascist junta, which the us and a dozen rich nations had kept in the saddle since 1965 with billions and billions of dollars. Later C. Philip Liechty, cia operations officer in Jakarta, confirmed that Ford and Kissinger had given Suharto the green light to invade Portuguese East-Timor.

On August 11, 1995, Henry presented a new book in a New-York Hotel. Hitschens recalled that the first question was raised by Constancio Pinto, a former Timorese resistance fighter, who asked where Kissinger had been when 200.000 Timorese were killed by Suharto's Army. Henry improvised and said that the subject of Timor never came up during the visit to Suharto. They had only been informed upon leaving at the

[p. 94]

airport that Timor would be invaded. The next questioner, Allan Nairn, confirmed that former President Ford in an interview with him had said that Timor had indeed been discussed during the Ford-Kissinger talks with Suharto. Nairn even produced a State Department transcript of the Jakarta talks, further confirming that the invasion of East-Timor had been on the agenda. Kissinger was lying with a straight face. C. Philip Liechty went even further. He said, that without heavy us logistics support the Dili operation would not even have been possible, therefore it had been elaborately discussed in Washington as well.

Hitchens presented further shocking details about the Nixon-Kissinger conspiracy to destroy Salvador Allende. In 1998 declassified documents showed how Henry had never before showed the slightest interest in Chili, but this time he intended to impress his boss with an efficient elimination plan. At cia headquarters in Langley a group was set up to map a two-track policy. ‘One the ostensible diplomatic one and the other - unknown to the State Department or the US ambassador to Chili, Edward Korry - a strategy of destabilization, kidnap and assassination, designed to provoke a military coup’, wrote Hitschens on the basis of the documents. This is the standard scenario for cia operations. They were a carbon copy of the set-up for the Jakarta coup of 1965. It had worked in so many places, and it would once more work beautifully against Allende in Chili. It worked in Grenada, in Surinam, in Panama, in Pakistan, everywhere.

December 2, 1998 some Chilean files were released, but as Hitchens warned, much of what Nixon, Kissinger, the visible or invisible Washington gangsters had done, would remain safely under seal. They are being held by the cia, the Defence Intelligence Agency, the State Department, the Pentagon, the National Security Council, the National Archives, the presidential libraries of Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter and other

[p. 95]

government agencies. No wonder. As long as the Chief White House mobster of those glorious Nixon years is still very much alive and kicking, and internationally revered and applauded, no-one is supposed to uncover the truth, until this shady character has left the earth for good. Nixon was carried to his grave two decades after Watergate as one of the greatest presidents in American history. Henry should get a mausoleum in Berlin.

Saddam

Norman Schwarzkopf, the man who was asked by George Bush I to annihilate Saddam, was once invited by the Shah of Iran to set up his secret police, the savak. Small world indeed. He later became commander of centcom (Central Command for the Middle East). Those days it was considered normal - and in line with international law - that us airplanes bombed Iranian oil platforms at sea, because the Iranian leadership was considered quite mad. Washington considered Saddam an ally, because he was fighting against the Ayatollahs. And Kuwait, Saudi-Arabia, Jordan, Britain, France and West-Germany helped Iraq in its mortal battle against Iran.

In 1989, however, the cia & Associates began to formulate War Plan 1002 to counter, what was perceived as a Soviet threat towards the Gulf. In 1990, centcom headquarters staged computer games called Internal Look, to test its war plans. In spite of Iraq having defeated Iran, centcom continued to consider Iraq a Kremlin ally, therefore Saddam remained a threat to the region, as Milosevic was a threat to the Balkans. General Schwarzkopf testified early in 1990 before the Senate, that Saddam was a danger for everyone in the Middle-East. The Iraqi leader knew of this conspiracy against him and he com-

[p. 96]

plained at an emergency Arab Summit in Baghdad that Washington was mobilizing its Arab allies against him. Of course, this was true and a full-scale cia operation. In July 1990, Saddam renewed his complaints and said that Kuwait was conspiring to hurt the Iraqi economy. Of course, this was also true, because Kuwait was being used as bait by the warmongers in Washington to further enrage Saddam hoping he would walk straight into the set trap. And, of course, he did, with both feet.

Kuwait had rested untill 1899 under Ottoman Turkish rule. The reigning sheik asked British protection. In 1921, Sir Percy Cox of the British Colonial Office drew a line on the map separating Kuwait permanently from Iraq. In practice, it meant Iraq lost its access to the Persian Gulf. Understandably, all Iraqi leaders struggled with a desire to regain its lost territory. In 1972 Baghdad nationalized the oil industry. One day before this was done, Nixon and Kissinger hatched a plot with the Shah of Iran to begin arming the Iraqi Kurds. The Kurds are being used by the cia to destabilize Saddam. Hence, Baghdad has employed Nixon-Kissinger type methods, including chemical warfare, copying the us example in Southeast Asia, against Kurd cia collaborators. This does not mean that Kurds, like everyone else, should be denied the right to have their own state and stop being refugees for ever. Listening to us Congressional representatives - or for that matter reading western commentators - calling Saddam a war criminal for his murderous policy toward the Kurd minority, equals the pot calling the kettle black.

Saddam was caught in the cia noose. He invaded Kuwait on August 2, 1990. Bob Woodward, in another book, The Commanders related, how Saddam, knowing that Washington could not be trusted, double-checked with us ambassador, April Glaspie (48), how her Government would react if Iraq was to march into Kuwait bringing order into chaos. Dick Cheney

[p. 97]

had said, that the us ‘would stick with its friends.’ What did it mean? ‘We have no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts like your border disagreement with Kuwait,’ she replied.⁷⁰ us Army Chief, Colin Powell was relieved, when he saw Glaspie's cable, because he felt there was room for negotiation. But, the invisible government had an improved War Plan 1002-90 ready, and this was the moment to unleash the cia dogs. No negotiations: war!

Woodward reconstructed step by step with precision how George Bush formed his grand alliance to attack Baghdad with an international assemblage of armed forces totalling some 600.000 soldiers to destroy Saddam. The Arab turncoat, Hosni Mubarak, received 8 billion dollars in debts to the west to be written off in exchange for sending Egyptian cannon fodder to join the Bush grand assault on his Arab brothers in Iraq. November 29, 1990, the Security Council passed Resolution 678 authorizing military force to drive Iraq from Kuwait if Saddam had not left by January 15, 1991. In a last ditch effort to prevent war from breaking out Secretary-of-State, James Baker and his Iraqi counterpart Tariq Azis met January 9, 1991 in Geneva. Baker handed Azis a letter from father Bush, that Iraq was to be wiped out if Kuwait was not evacuated by Iraqi troops immediately. Azis refused to carry the letter to Baghdad and handed it back to Texas cowboy Baker.

January 17, 1991 the United-States & Co. began to bomb Iraq with some 2.000 planes daily, an air assault that was to last 42 days and had never been seen in the region before. There were the usual mishaps, like the one with the public shelter in Baghdad, when a us precision bomb accidentally scored a direct hit, by which some 1.500 civilians were killed. Ramsey Clark, former Attorney General of President Lyndon Johnson was in Baghdad during the bombardments by his nation's pilots. He became so enraged, that he fired letters off to the Secretary-General of the un, Xavier Perez de Cuellar and to Pres-

70 Bob Woodward, The Commanders, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1991, p.p. 212.

[p. 98]

ident Bush to limit the bombing of military targets and stop the mass killing of civilians. ‘The United Nations must not be an accessory to war crimes,’ he cautioned de un.

In his book, The Fire This Time Clark explained how he assisted in setting up a Commission of Inquiry for an International War Crimes Tribunal.⁷¹ He drafted 19 detailed preliminary charges of crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the us Government, ‘all based on evidence already available as measured by international laws defining crimes against peace and war crimes. These laws included The Hague and Geneva Conventions and the Nuremberg Charter.’ He continued, ‘This book shows how the us Constitution and the un Charter were violated, and describes the international laws defining war crimes. It analyses the American media's failure to adequately inform the American public and world public opinion: an essential element in understanding the tragedy and preventing its repetition. This failure made possible the celebration of a slaughter and reveals the helplessness of a world, however democratic, that is ignorant or misinformed, even when its life is at stake.’⁷²

Clark's eyewitness report said: ‘A careful look at American involvement in the region reveals that the us Government, and not Iraq, bears prime responsibility for the war, which was planned in Washington long before the first Iraqi soldier entered Kuwait. The us used the Kuwaiti royal family to provoke an Iraqi invasion that would justify a massive assault on Iraq to establish us dominion in the Gulf.’ Actually, it is incomprehensible, that while Washington has been playing the same dirty tricks over and over again, nations and leaders everywhere, can be for ever lured like meek sheep into the next cia trap, like organizing a coalition of peace loving nations attacking Kosovo 8 years later.

Bob Woodward drew similar conclusions as Clark following talks in Washington to the leading players of Operation

71 Ramsey Clark, The Fire This Time, Thunder Mouth's Press, New York, 1992.

72 Ramsey Clark, The Fire This Time, Thunder Mouth's Press, New York, 1992, Preface XVII-XVIII.

[p. 99]

Desert Storm. While Senator Sam Nunn of the Armed Services Committee still wanted to know from Bush Sr., Cheney and Powell if a war was in the vital interests of the United-States, these men had made up their minds to go ahead no matter what anybody said. Even the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral William Crowe, wondered aloud about the rush to go to war: ‘Everyone is so impatient,’ he said. There have been, no doubt, eyebrows raised around the world, when the same clique of jingoist troublemakers returned in one way or the other after the election stolen in 2000, that actually was won by Al Gore with no less than 600.000 popular ballots. Bush junior occupies the White House solely courtesy of a partisan and crooked decision by a Supreme Court dominated by conservatives. No-one dares to suggest, as yet, that the return of another Bush clan was engineered by the cia and the invisible government. Yet, few were really surprised at events during the Florida election. Americans have become accustomed to reprehensible conduct by those who lead their country. Neither is anybody going to be surprised if at some future date someone is going to spill the beans in Washington and divulge that Small George took over from Big George and kidnapped the White House from Al Gore in an undercover operation by the invisibles in order to open the palace gates once more to former Cold War militants and oil barons of Texas.

Woodward's reconstruction of White House decisionmaking to destroy the Kremlin's closest ally in the Middle East - as the Bush clan saw it - is a chilling tale bordering delusion and madness. For obvious reasons the cia raised alarm about Saddam's imaginary power, that he perhaps could march from Kuwait to the Saudi capital Riyadh, only 275 miles away. General Brent Scowcroft of the White House expressed the opinion, that Saddam had to be removed one way or the other and it had to be done by the cia in secret. We know what this

[p. 100]

could mean sending him the Mafia with poisoned cigars, deadly toothpaste, or god knows what else.

Bob Woodward discovered that father Bush had in the end ordered the cia to begin preparations for a covert operation to destabilize the Saddam regime. He wanted an all-out effort to strangle the Iraqi economy. Anti-Saddam resistance groups inside or outside Iraq should be given all the necessary assistance. The cia should start selecting leaders who could take over from Saddam. This reminds us of Fidel. Washington has been aiming to remove him one way or the other since 1960. Woodward quotes the senior Bush as having said in 1990, ‘If there ever was a case for covert action undertaken in the national interest, this is it.’ He asked Cheney, Powell and Schwarzkopf to come to Camp David to discuss the military options to topple Saddam.⁷³ One reads these lines as a European and wonders whether Americans have gone collectively crazy, that they no longer realize, that such thinking and behaviour of their President is clearly of a criminal nature and to most people in the world totally unacceptable. Who empowered the White House to behave as a global public prosecutor? Judge Clark's Chapter III dealt with war crimes against Iraq's civilian population and is a sickening shocker. There were 109.000 overflights in 42 days unloading 88.500 tons of explosives. ‘The bombing of Iraq's cities and infrastructure had nothing to do with driving Iraq from Kuwait. It was intended to cripple a developing Third World country that was a politically independent military power in the region,’ he wrote.⁷⁴ He discovered, that in July 1990, prior to Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, ‘war games at Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina identified 27 strategic sites in Iraq, projecting Baghdad as an aggressor. On August 7, five days after the invasion of Kuwait this number was enlarged to 57 and after that to 87 strategic targets inside Iraq to be destroyed.’

In July another possible ‘war game’ against Iraq was con-

73 Bob Woodward, The Commanders, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1991, p.p. 238.

74 Ramsey Clark, The Fire This Time, Thunder Mouth's Press, New York, 1992, p.p. 59.

[p. 101]

ducted at the Naval War College. The question: how to respond to an Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Three realistic options were discussed:

1	to assassinate Saddam.
2	punitive raids on vital targets as refineries, pipelines and power lines and
3	bringing in ground troops with air support to the Arabian peninsula.

Clark: ‘In reality each option was pursued.’ The us Air Force Chief of Staff, General Michael Dugan added to reporters, that one ultimate aim would be downtown Bagdad. Hermann Göring reasoned the same way when he bombed the heart of the city of Rotterdam in 1940 to force Holland to surrender to Nazi Germany. General Dugan added: ‘If I want to hurt you, it would be at home, not out in the woods some place.’ This was too close to the truth even for then Secretary of Defence, Dick Cheney, who fired the general. Ramsey Clark explained, that Bush had stressed, that the us buildup in Saudi-Arabia had been of a defensive nature, while Dugan's statements betrayed us plans, that Washington was not only planning an offensive war, but was to target civilians.

Noam Chomsky has analysed article 51 of the un Charter, which states that individual or collective self-defence against armed attack is permissible in the case of armed attack until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Washington had over the years developed the unalterable position that national interests of the us preclude the acceptance of any external constraints, which in practice means, we do as we please, un or no un. That was the attitude with which Hitler and Mussolini brought down the earlier League of Nations in Geneva as an effective instrument of international law and order. The un Charter was designed to subordinate the national interests to

[p. 102]

global interests. The problem the world is faced with at the start of the 21ste century is, that there is momentarily only one all powerful super-state that behaves as Super Rogue Power, because it ranks global interests secondary to its national interests and is totally convinced it has the right to behave that way, in spite of the Charter of the un or any other international treaties.

When Secretary-General Kofi Annan of the un travelled in 1998 to Baghdad to try to mediate the us-Iraq military impasse Mrs. Madeleine Albright bluntly said, she wished him well, ‘and when he comes back we will see what he has brought and how it fits our national interest.’⁷⁵ In Albrights words, Washington ‘will act multilaterally when we can, and unilaterally when we must.’ Fascist reasoning has been polluting the minds of the visible and invisible decisionmakers in Washington for a long time. Globalisation will never ever become a reality, if the most powerful economy in the world continues to be ruled by gangsters and rogue elements, who refuse to abide by principles of international law and instead follow vigilante tactics backed up by a universal fear for intercontinental missiles with multiple nuclear warheads.

75 Noam Chomsky, Rogue States, The Rule of Force in World Affairs, Southern Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2000. p.p, 12-33.

Colombia

In October 2000 Senators Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Rob Wyden sounded a warning. They issued a Report on Secrecy in International and Domestic Policy Making. ‘As we enter the 21st century, the great fear we have for our Democracy is the enveloping culture of government secrecy and the corresponding distrust of Government that follows.’ The senators echoed what David Wise and Thomas Ross had warned for in 1964, followed by Colonel Prouty in 1973. Wise and Prouty

[p. 103]

personally opened my eyes to what was really going on in Washington mostly out of sight of both lawmakers and public. Let alone, lawmakers and public in nations that trusted the us and called themselves allies of America.

James Bamford, investigative reporter for abc Television ‘World News Tonight with Peter Jennings’ and a writer for The New York Times and other serious media, published in 2001 a 721 page study Body Secrets.⁷⁶ He carefully analysed the National Security Agency in Washington. The headquarters of this mysterious arm of ‘the government within the government’ is located near Annapolis Junction in Maryland. Bamford describes this hornets' nest of ruthless killers as ‘a labyrinth of barbedwired fences, motion detectors, hydraulic antitruck devices. And thick cement barriers.’ This government pirates den is guarded by commandos in black paramilitary uniforms, wearing special headgear, and brandishing an assortment of weapons including Colt 9mm submachine guns, like in a Hollywood movie scene. The complex is called Crypto City and consists of some sixty building. Tens of thousands of people are employed here in absolute secrecy. According to Bamford most employees do not tell their wives what they do. It is also home to the largest collection of hyperpowerful computers on the planet and a laboratory for advanced mathematicians and language experts.

Bamford, too, starts off by remembering Wild Bill Donovan as the father of all us spies. He painted a fascinating portrait of how during the years of Cold War Washington glided towards an unchallenged position of turning into the intelligence capital of the world. The Donovan Boys in Crypto City are in detail informed how a certain factory in Chili in Pinochet times produced cluster bombs for the armed forces of Saddam Hussein.⁷⁷

Body Secrets shows how the National Security Agency and the cia are often at loggerheads, because the nsa became a super-

[p. 104]

star. A ‘war’ constantly rages between these two spy organisations over who will get how many billions from Congress to carry on the work. At one time the nsa was led by Admiral Bob Inman, nicknamed ‘the dark prince of intelligence.’ cia boss those days was Admiral Stansfield Turner. The two were fighting over the billions needed to finance their gargantuan satellite program. Washington referred to the affair as ‘the battle of the Admirals.’

For Europeans, whose nations are closely allied to Mafia Incorporated in Washington, books like the Bamford report are sickening to read, because it demonstrates, what happens if a gigantic military industrial complex like the United States runs amok and demonstrates a creeping tendency to copy Hitlerite thinking of having become the sole nation capable of saving the world. In order to achieve this noble goal the military power of the us became equal to none. Foreign leaders that entertain different views will be assassinated, overthrown or chased away from their home countries at the pleasure of the Donovan boys. Washington seems to prefer a kind of law of the jungle, what the Bush II Administration openly calls, ‘a la carte multilateralism.’ The Director of the State Department Planning Group, Richard Haass elaborated to The New York Times, that this meant that the Government would have a close reading of all signed treaties, and that the Bushites were going to determine which ones were no longer in line with present us national interests and therefore had to be scrapped. The world is in for some further big surprises.

Loch Johnson of the University of Georgia listed in Secret Agencies the options by which the us feels free to intervene when it fits its own interests:

‘Use of chemical-biological and other deadly agents; secret wars; assassination plots; small-scale coup d'états; major economic dislocations, like crop, livestock destruction; environmental alterations; pinpointed retaliation against non-com-

[p. 105]

batants; torture; hostage taking; sophisticated arms supplies; training of foreign military forces for war; limited arms supplies for offensive purposes; massive funding of autocracies; sharing of sensitive intelligence; embassy break-ins; high-level intrusive political surveillance; high level recruitment and penetrations; disinformation against democratic regimes; disinformation against autocratic regimes,’ etcetera. Johnson named additional options and added: ‘These activities represent little or no infringement of a nation's sovereignty and the widely held view that nations should not intervene blatantly in one another's internal affairs. They are widely practiced with minimal international repercussions.’ In the view of this observer, the conclusion by Loch Johnson is dangerous nonsense. If all nations in the world would scrap all treaties like Bush II is doing, the global village would sink into anarchy. Another large-scale illegal us operation is currently taking place in Colombia, where Washington unilaterally declared war on local drug lords. Colombia, with 41 million people is the third largest country in Latin America and the second most important in biodiversity. It is the world's number one cocaine supplier. The drug lords are financing three irregular armies, two on the left and one on the right, all para-military vigilantes. Smack in the middle of this combat area Washington has placed its own hired killers to advise the Colombians how to cut each others throats more effectively. In this reportage it was shown in what detail the cia Manuals advise Latino rightists as how to increase terror and bloodshed to kill off leftists.

William Blum reported in Rogue state, ‘The us has aided (Colombian) Government raids and other military activists by providing helicopters, intelligence information about guerilla movements, satellite images and communication intercepts. At times, us planes fly overhead during combat operations. A report by Amnesty International pinpoints the real us

[p. 106]

war aims in Columbia. It said that tens of thousands of people were killed, not as a result of drug wars but for political reasons. While us bad boys pretend they oppose the cocaine trade, in reality, us advisors are out there to murder trade unionists, human rights activists and leaders of legal left-wing movements.’ History repeats itself. For the Americans it is fine to kill on the left and one is a war criminal when the killing is done on the right. Amnesty warned: ‘us supplied military equipment, ostensibly delivered for use against narcotics traffickers, is being used by the Colombian military to commit these human rights abuses in the name of ‘counter-insurgency’. A hundred million dollars was sent by Washington to finance mercenaries for the purpose of stoking new guerrilla fires and kill possible future leftist leaders in Columbia by the thousands. Here, too, the us is carrying out substantial mischief and causing bloodletting and infinite suffering for thousands of people under the aegis of noble fight against drug lords. In reality, the sick minds in Crypto City, Maryland and at cia headquarters in Langley, Virginia - and if not there, for certain at the White House itself - are hunting down Latin leftists and communists and using the Columbian drug trade as an excuse. It happened in Panama, it is repeated here. Bush massacres leftist latinos, in exactly the same fashion as Milosevic asked general Mladic to get rid of uck terrorists who were invading Kosovo at the behest of the cia and the Secret Team.. Noam Chomsky quotes in The New Military Humanisme⁷⁸ Human Rights Watch data and concludes that the us has ‘blood on his hands’ in Colombia. Washington turned Colombia into the leading recipient of us arms and training, resulting in a sharp rise of violence, turning that Latin nation into experiencing ‘the worst humanitarian crisis in the Western Hemisphere since the us ran slaughter and terror during the 60s, 70s and 80s in Central America.’ In 1999 there were 2-3000 people killed in Colombia and 300.000 became refugees.

[p. 107]

Chomsky: ‘The state terror operations follow guidelines provided by the Kennedy Administration which advised the Colombia military ‘to select civilian and military personnel (...) as necessary execute paramilitary, sabotage and/or terrorist activities against known Communist proponents. It should be backed by the United States.’ Professor Chomsky discovered, that the sole independent political party in Colombia ‘was virtually eliminated by assassination of thousands of its elected officials, candidates and activists. The primary victims have been peasants, particulary those who dared to raise their heads in a regime of brutal repression and enormous poverty in the midst of highly-praised economic succes’.⁷⁹ Colombia is another repeat performance of what us rogue elements wrought for instance Indonesia where hundreds of thousands of peasants and workers butchered with the assistance of us criminal minds, weapons and money.

It was disconcerting reading, when Chomsky reported that the Clinton Administration was particulary enthusiastic in its praise of President Gavira, whose tenure in office was responsible for appalling levels of violence, as reported by Human Rights organisations. ‘Atrocities run the gamut’, observed the mit professor, ‘while currently us military aid to Colombia continues to be used in indiscriminate bombing and other atrocities, and is slated to increase sharply for 1999, probably taking the first place internationally apart from, Israel and Egypt, which belong to a separate category.’⁸⁰

Drug gangs of unemployed urban youths were turned into ‘sicarios’, or hired killers. The drug business finances three irregular Colombian armies. ‘On the left,’ reported the Economist on April 21^st, 2001, ‘fight guerillas of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (farc) and the smaller National Liberation Front (fln). On the right, bands of military vigilantes, most of whom are organised in the United Self Defence Forces of Colombia (auc). The conflict between the

[p. 108]

guerrillas and the security forces, which enjoy the unofficial (and increasingly unwelcome) support of the paramilitaries, began decades ago. The governement's writ runs over only about half of this vast country - though that includes the cities, where most Colombians live.’

Naturally, Washington felt obliged in the name of freedom and democracy to step into this incredibly confusing mess, which in essence remained a struggle between rich and poor, between basic social justice and the lifting of the masses to a better life. Washington, and the computer playing assholes at Crypto City, automatically associate left with Communist and seem incapable of understanding that if there is ever a semblance of fair play for all in the world to be reached, the wave is to the left, not to the right. Economic warfare against Cuba with a Helms Burton Act fail in the end, as history will show. That's why Fidel Castro told the students at Rio de Janeiro University, June 30, 1999, ‘Forty years have passed and they (us) keep trying. But the more time passes, the more puzzled they are. They undoubtedly think we are a special kind of bug. But, no we are exactly the same as all the other bugs. It is just, that we have become bugs with a consciousness.’ No doubt the farc fighters, and others in Columbia, share these words by the Cuban leader to the Brasilian students, ‘That is the only evolution that has taken place in Cuba. It is with this consciousness that we have defended ourselves throughout all this time, and even more so when we were left completely alone in terms of our economic relations with our basic markets and sources of credits and supplies, and without access to any of the international financial institutions.’

In 2000 there were, according to the Columbian Government 1.777 death. The Columbia Commission of Jurists said there were 6.067 dead victims of the ‘socio-political violence’. The Commission says that the us supported paramilitaries were responsible for 49 per cent of the hunted, while the guerrillas

[p. 109]

killed 11 per cent. Both groups kill ‘collaborators’ that work with ‘the enemy’. There were an additional, 3.707 kidnappings, which makes Colombia the world's leader in this business.

Washington injects 440 million dollars solely for training three so-called anti-drugs Army battalions, totalling 2.500 men. They are equipped with 16 Blackhawk guerrilla warfare helicopters. In Putumayo province 29.000 hectares of coca farms have been sprayed, recalling the worst days of the Vietnam war. Farmers fear that glyphosate is harming their health. Millions of gallons of chemicals have already rained down on Colombian jungles and farmlands. And while this all goes on The Economist reports, that the paramilitaries, in 1993 numbering 1.200, in 1998 4.500 are the fastest growing force now totalling 8.000: ‘They are responsible for many of the worst atrocities against civilians.’ And who are the financiers, weapons dealers, and chemical warfare producers of the criminals in Colombia? The Latin paramilitaries are simply a stand-in for us Marines like the uck is in Albania.

The London Observer reported, that Bush junior was engineering a back door military escalation by raising a private army in the Latin drugs war. Foreign Affairs editor Peter Beaumont wrote July 22, 2001: ‘A new 676 million dollar program - the Andean Counterdrug Initiative - would allow the Bush administration to deploy as many former servicemen as it wanted.’ The suspicion is justified, that since Bush son entered the White House, the nature of the Latin American war against drugs is handled entirely by the invisibles in Washington. And, as is standard procedure with the Secret Team and the cia, they are secretly changing the character of the anti-drugs war into covert us military assistance to the fascist regime in Colombia, which is entangled with various guerrilla movements. In the past, the Security Council of the un would have been convened to discuss the bloody conflict in Colombia.

[p. 110]

No-one seems to care anymore what happens to rural campesinos, who die by the thousands each year, caught in the crossfire between us and Colombian rangers and a majority of guerrillas, who consider Fidel Castro their teacher. Now the junior Bush is set on expanding the bloodbath.

To my Dutch readers I am obliged to add: my friends, this is the behaviour of our beloved allies in Washington. These are the rogues who tell our government in The Hague, we had to join them in a war against Irak, or Yugoslavia, and god knows where tomorrow, or else. The time has come for Western Europe to let the Atlantic Alliance go. Perhaps nato was following World War II a rational solution to meet the realities in the second half of the 20th century. George Bush (son) is right when he says, the Cold War days are over, we now have to revise the Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972. It is even more urgent to scrap the nato Alliance of 1947 now. The future of Europe lies in the East of Europe and Russia and not in North America. And, the East will never fully trust its Western peninsula as long as we remain entangled in a pact with the vigilantes of Wild Bill Donovan.

Milosevic

Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington interprets history as the record of human civilizations. The West is in relative decline. Asia is expanding and lslam is on the rise. Perhaps, recent events on the Balkans - with their Muslim component - reflect a microcosm of future historic developments. Yugoslavia broke up over the past decade. During the postwar rule of Jozef Broz Tito a relative calm reigned between ethnic population groups. Slobodan Milosevic was supposed to keep the nation together. His bad luck was, that Washington

[p. 111]

decided the moment had arrived to cleanse the Balkans of the vestiges of communism for once and for all. The true story of how the Kosovo Liberation Army (kla-uck) transformed in twelve months from a 200 member guerrilla band into a 12.000 uniformed, armed to the teeth fighting force, will have to become clear over the years to come.

Albania is made up of Ghegs, Tosks, Greeks, Vlachs, Gypsies, Montenegrin Serbs, Malissores and Bulgars. Tirana was the last East European nation to open in 1954 diplomatic relations with Peking. But after the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956, Albania began to warm up to China. In 1960 Enver Hoxha sided with Mao and attacked the policies of Nikita Khrushchev. ‘China urgently needed a Communist ally in Europe,’ British journalist Richard Deacon stated in his book The Chinese Secret Service.⁸¹ ‘In fact, the Chinese moved in as the Russians moved out.’ Albania became Peking's principal listening post in the West. Radio and code links were established. Washington strategists decided on the Communist odd man out in the Balkans to launch from its territory an all-out attack on Milosevic's collapsing federation. In Albania lived mercenaries, that hated the Serbs sufficiently to attack Kosovo for free. The trap being prepared for Belgrade resembled in more ways than one way the tricks played on Saddam in Kuwait. Milosevic never ever dreamt of the possibility, that when he signed the order to chase invading Albanians out of his sovereign land, he could possibly end up accused of War Crimes in a prison cell in The Hague. Let alone, that a blood-brother, Zoran Djindjic, would sell him for 1.28 billion dollars to the enemy.

Madeleine Albright, and her accommodating colleagues from France and Britain played a dirty diplomatic game in the French castle of Rambouillet. They presented a so-called peace proposal, that in fact contained a killer clause and was nothing but a prearranged ultimatum. For instance, if accepted,

[p. 112]

nato troops would be free to move anywhere in Yugoslavia, including its airspace and its territorial waters. No Serb President could ever accept such humiliating conditions. Therefore, the nato was fully prepared for a war that could be started on an hour's notice.

The Yugoslav side had introduced a Revised Draft Agreement at Rambouillet, that neither the media, nor the Russians knew about. It had been kept out of sight by the Conference organizers. The Yugoslavs called a press conference March 18 at 11:00 hours, which was attended by a few journalists. It was too late anyway. The White House and the Donovan boys, had already decided many months before this so-called peace-conference, that Yugoslavia would be brought to its knees, so that traitors like Djindjic could take over, the Pinochet of Yugoslavia.

Noam Chomsky stressed that ‘the hysterical exaggeration of the enemy's unfathomable evil’ by western propaganda attacking Milosevic personally as a second Hitler threatening the very survival of civilisation. It reminded him of a form of holocaust revisionism.⁸² There is nothing more demeaning for a Marxist than to be compared to the Nazi dictator, and whatever can be said of the Yugoslav leader, he was not a Hitler. But, for some dark reason, when Air Force General Curtis LeMay shouts ‘Let's bomb Vietnam back to the Stone Age’, Americans feel that its fine, while he raved like any commander in Göring's Luftwaffe.

When nato began bombing Serbia on March 24, 1999, Tony Blair declared ‘The new generation draws the line.’ nato was finally waging war to defend ‘values (...) the brutal repression of whole ethnic groups will no longer be tolerated (...) those responsible for such crimes have nowhere to hide.’ Bill Clinton spoke in similar terms. Colonel-psychologist Dave Gross-man must have told his students at West-Point, ‘Now, at last, nato superiority is leading us to the noble kill.’⁸³

[p. 113]

The latest fabrication out of Washington was, that the rich nations were unselfishly risking lives, to fight the very first ‘humanitarian war’ in the history of mankind. In reality they were after Milosevic, just as George Bush Sr. dispatched 36.000 marines to pick up Manuel Noriega in Panama, or as warships and bombers appeared before the coast of Lybia to scare the hell out of Qadaffi, or as 600.000 men were shipped to the Middle East to invade Iraq and make Saddam shit in his pants. This time, however, it was not the Americans by themselves, who behaved like fascists, violating all instruments of international law, but Washington and London managed to drag the entire nato Alliance into their illegal, vigilante adventure to teach Milosevic a lesson. Now they were in reality carrying out what the computer games had told them in Crypto City in Maryland, usa. And, when it was all over, and the smoke over Yugoslav cities had lifted, the nato allies called Milosevic & Co dead easy the true war criminals.

Once more Washington was after a foreign leader that the Donovan boys did not like and did not agree with, just as their fathers had persued Uncle Ho in Hanoi, Sukarno in Indonesia, Sihanouk in Cambodia, Bhutto in Pakistan, and all the others. But in the 60s and 70s it was considered quite normal that the us engaged in massive ethnic cleansing in Asia. Carpet bombing of civilian populations, chemical warfare, Agent orange, assassinating President Diem and his brother, bombing Laos and Cambodia in the absence of a un Resolution, was all considered quite acceptable and necessary for the overall crusade against communism. Allright, it might have been large scale genocide, an Asian holocaust made in usa, but now, all this should be forgotten, according to Blair. A new generation was designing new ways to achieve its goals and serve it's interests. nato was sending supersonic bombers over Serbia and Kosovo at stratospheric heights, that Soviet made sam missiles could not reach them, as long as bridges, televi-

[p. 114]

sion stations, factories and enough people were getting destroyed or killed. Then the Yugoslavs would finally start to hate Milosevic, hasten his demise, so that the West could cry victory again.

In the 60s and 70s voices about us criminal behaviour were being raised by Lord Bertrand Russell, Jean Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir. Today, it is Nelson Mandela, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Samuel Huntington, Ramsey Clark and others who point to Washington as the seat of the world's Rogue Super Power. The offshoot of the Group of Non Aligned Nations, created in Bandung, Indonesia in 1955 by Sukarno is being called in the 21^th century the G-77, which unites 133 countries making up 80 per cent of the world's population. They met in April 2000 in Havana where the so-called right of Clinton, Blair and nato to conduct humanitarian military interventions outside the united Nations was rejected. They called the latest Washington-London invention of war for humanitarian reasons a new form of imperialism in disguise. They likewise condemned globalisation as a derailment of Western capitalist ideology.

Nelson Mandela resented the behaviour of the uk and us to ride roughshod over the un and initiating wars against Irak and Yugoslavia. He told Bill Clinton to his face, during the presidential visit to Pretoria, that it was not for Washington to decide who his friends were. Castro, Arafat and Qaddafi supported South-Africa in the struggle against apartheid. He had no intention to desert his friends, because Clinton did not like them. Never before had an American President been addressed by a foreign head-of-state in such blunt language. Mandela's popularity with us blacks skyrocketed further.

Solzhenitsyn, too, accused Washington of acting in World Affairs as if the united Nations no longer existed. Also, Samuel Huntington observed, as quoted by Chomsky, ‘One reads about the world's desire for American leadership only in the

[p. 115]

United-States, while everywhere else one reads about American arrogance and American unilateralism.’ There are also lesser American gods, who showed exasperation about the lies and misrepresentations by their Government.

James G. Jatras, policy analyst of the Republican Senate Policy Committee, a former State Department employee wrote about nato's Alice-in-Wonderland interpretation of why Yugoslavia had to be attacked. ‘nato's version of reality went something like this. The crisis in Kosovo is simply the latest episode in the aggressive drive by extreme Serbian nationalism, orchestrated by Slobodan Milosevic, to create an ethnically pure Greater Serbian State. That aggression, first in Slovenia, then in Croatia, and then in Bosnia, finally came to Kosovo, largely because the West - notably nato - refused to stand up to Milosevic.’ Jatras traces us assistance to the Kosovo Liberation Army to ‘simplistic nato mythology.’ nato credibility would be destroyed if genocide was allowed in the heart of Europe at the dawn of the 21st century. Hence, open warfare was unavoidable. Jatras next explains, that the war of Kosovo was the result of the uck deliberate strategy of turning a political confrontation into a military one. That was, as usual, the standard cia script, popular in Washington since the Bay of Pigs adventure. uck attacks were directed not only at Serbian police and officials but Serbian civilians as weil, deliberately calculated to trigger a massive and largely indiscriminate response by Serbian forces. Who were the no. 1 war criminals? Washington initiated, armed and directed uck. The Serbs walked into the trap and produced a ruthless response to being attacked by an army of cia mercenaries in disguise. They had no other choice.

Jatras: ‘The Clinton Administration's claim that nato resorted to force only after diplomacy had failed is flatly untrue.’ He continued, ‘The decision to bomb turned Kosovo from a crisis into a disaster, we no longer had a Kosovo policy, we had

[p. 116]

a uck policy (...). The Clinton Administration elevated to virtually unchallenged status as the legitimate representative of the Kosovo Albaninan people a terrorist group, whose acitivities raise very serious questions about its criminal involvement particularly in the drug trade - and about radical Islamic influences, including those of Osama bin Laden and the Iranians.’⁸⁴

Doug Bandow, a former special assistant to President Reagan, now a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, summed up the ridiculous flaws in the Clinton Administration policy:

1	‘Washington illegally embarked upon a war, in contravention of the us Constitution, the nato Treaty and the un Charter.
2	Clinton and the us allies (shamefully Holland was bamboozled into participating) launched an unprovoked attack on a nation that had threatened no-one, thereby lowering the bar against aggressive war worldwide.
3	Deepened European dependence on America for defense of European interests that have little relevance to America and
4	Put us soldiers at risk without any serious, let alone vital, American interest at stake.’

Clinton and Blair - I wrote to my Prime Minister Wim Kok an urgent letter, ‘Your friends Bill and Tony are behaving like hoodlums’ - were telling the world that their war was based on morality to oppose a vicious campaign of ethnic cleansing, they were lying. In fact nato's war against Serbia illustrated the worst sort of hypocrisy for all the world to see.’⁸⁵

The time of writing, summer 2001, the tragedy on the Balkan is teeter-tottering towards an end which pleases Washington since it meets its expectations in the quest for its next crusade: globalisation. The Tito state is broken up. Barefaced lies, duplicity, and a concoction of manipulated figures of genocide

[p. 117]

attributed only to the Serbs were used by the us Government, to justify its own war crimes against Yugoslavia, thereby manipulating world public opinion on its side against Milosevic. Its exactly what war criminal Ariel Sharon is doing to Palestinian freedom fighters and Hamas, telling the world that all he is doing is fighting for the security for Jews, while in reality, he is a terrorist in charge of the armed forces an intelligence operations of a fully-fledged, internationally recognized state. Palestinians are not forgotten the attrocities associated with Sharon in 1953 in Qibya or in 1982 in Sabra and Chatila. Israelis keep complaining as if they alone are the victims of an Arab Jihad. They overlook that their own arrogant Nazi type behavior ignited an uprising, that has become unstoppable. The entire world has now seen stone throwing Palestinian youths who are exposed to the latest array of modern us weapons in return, including rockets, helicopters, F-16's and life bullets.

The Israeli people brought back a man with a terrorist past. He had to leave the Israeli Army because he was found guilty of being responsible for mass murders in Palestinian refugee camps. Carla del Ponte desperately wants to bring Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic to The Hague. Why not Sharon? When cnn shows Colin Powell flanked at a pressconference in Washington by the Israeli Prime Minister and expresses satisfaction that Milosevic had been locked up in The Hague, he looks like a fool, because his honoured guest at his side is himself a first class war criminal.

The criminal behaviour against foreign leaders or nations around the world by the White House is by now so well documented, that one could fill up several Airbuses with outright proven us war criminals to be flown to the International Tribunal in The Hague. In the eyes of Washington, they now have the big trophy of Balkan communism behind bars. But according to Ramsey Clark, Milosevic was systematically de-

[p. 118]

prived of his basic rights by this kangaroo court, which follows orders from the invisible government in Washington. Only American brains could have inspired Carla del Ponte to force Milosevic to receive his wife Mira Markovic via a telephone behind bulletproof glass.

But, America beware, it might be an uphill battle, but the demasqué of the liar who became a thief is in full progress. At last, people everywhere, are waking up to the notion as to who the real rogues are. If there were no Wild Bill Donovan boys on the loose, there would be no need for Osama bin Laden, de farc in Columbia, a Hamas, a case like that of Mu- mia Aby-Jamal, or the blowing-up of Flight 103 of Pan Am in Scotland in reaction to the shooting down of an Iranian passenger airbus by the trigger happy captain of a us missile cruiser over international waters. In short, were there no American rogues we would all live in quite a different world. 12 september 2001. Yesterday, this brochure was ready to go to print. But then, September 11, four us passenger planes were hijacked. The World Trade Centre was flattened and the Pentagon severely damaged, two centres of evil in the eyes of Timothy McVeigh and his counter-revolutionary comrades. Some years ago Americans set up a horrific bomb blast in Oklahoma City, the first signal of resistance against the existing evil and terrorist forces of the United States of America, as described here before consisting of the Secret Team, the White House, the cia, the Pentagon and violent criminals as the Donovan boys, multiplied by the worldwide influence and power of Wall Street.

While George Bush II spoke about the evil of human nature and ‘our freedom came under attack’ all eyes in the western part of the world turned to Afghanistan and the Saudi terrorist Osama bin Laden. But we witnessed yesterday an attack by Americans on America. McVeigh's execution by the state has been revenged by those who share his views - among others

[p. 119]

- after what they lived through and saw what happened in Desert Storm and the continued illegal bombardments against Irak. It is a fact that Muslims around the world entertain similar views on the criminal behaviour of the American secret state. But the architecture of yesterdays war plan against the symbols of American evil in the world, has been the product of American brains, some of them former military men themselves, like McVeigh was. It will take some time before the picture of what happened yesterday will become clear. Washington is liable to take premature action in retaliation, as was done in the case of Sudan, when cruise missiles were fired at a factory, they said was working on biological warfare, and turned out to have been doing nothing of the sort.

Today, September 12, all western television stations agree, it is 99 per cent sure, Osama bin Laden was the devil who designed this plan of death and destruction in his bunker in Afghanistan. I disagree. The lies of Dallas in 1963 were repeated. The nation was told that jfk had been assassinated by one man, Lee Harvey Oswald. That's what the nation wanted to believe and no-one ever found the true perpetrators. The same trick was used after Oklahoma City, Timothy McVeigh had done it all by himself. Yes, he had a few obscure friends, but again, the nation went back to its beauty sleep.

Human Rights

The latest hoax in the arsenal of us dirty tricks is the sudden shift from the earlier crusade to destroy communism and promote freedom, democracy and a free market economy, towards a spirited drive for so-called universal human rights. The theme remains the same, like sending Stealth bombers to Yugoslavia to force Milosevic into submission, only the tune

[p. 120]

has been changed. Clinton and Blair, acting as common hoodlums, initiated the Kosovo war to safeguard the credibility of nato at the time of its fiftieth anniversary. They managed to hoodwink a majority of nato parliamentarians in two continents to buy their lies. Massive terror and death were inflicted upon the Yugoslav people. To capture Manuel Noriega father Bush used thousands of soldiers in Panama to pick him up. By solely using air power Clinton managed to get Milosevic behind bars. In 1940, Hermann Göring forced Holland to surrender after a heavy bombardment of Rotterdam. Washington was equally self-congratulating about defeating the Serbs as Berlin was about the Dutch in 1940.

The inescapable result of dirty minds is that they produce fuzzy and criminal thinking. us and nato policies on the Balkans have inflicted irreparable harm and damage on masses of innocent people. Hitler went here beserk during the forties. Hand in hand with the military industrial complex, Nazi Germany slided from bad to worse. The unchecked Donovan boys are turning evermore into a us version of the Waffen ss, which took the lead in the universal holocaust of World War II. Jews unfortunately tend to feel, that they alone suffered from the Nazis that went mad. The end of current Washington madness is not in sight. No doubt, more Kosovo's are on the way.

This report highlights some of the modus operandi which led America to the dubious status of Super Rogue of the 21st century. More and more Europeans are becoming aware of Washington realities and would prefer Brussels to turn eastward and instead build alliances with Eastern Europe and Russia. nato is a relic based on realities dating back to Potsdam and the end of World War II, when Stalin loomed as a dark shadow over the western European peninsula. I reported from Moscow from 1971 to 1988 only to discover, that the ussr had never ever had the slightest intention of invading western Eu-

[p. 121]

rope, as Washington and London were telling us. Western Europe was simply scared into fearing the worst from the Kremlin and Europeans were actually believing that the Russians were aiming at another European war. This was mainly a selfserving fabrication for the benefit of us military industrial complex and the expected corresponding rise of Wall Street Stocks. A nation, destroyed from the Ukraine to Stalingrad, rather then scheming for another military conflict, harboured different priorities in the nuclear age. We all fell for us scare tactics and massive anti-Soviet propaganda.

December 10, 1948, the un passed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (ud). The thirty articles in this covenant are a passport to a decent way of life for all. Washington was ready to ignore the agreed upon rules as long as the Cold War raged. Article 9, for instance, stipulates that arbitrary arrest, detention and exile are forbidden. The framers of this text should have added that to murder, kidnap or overthrow leaders of other member states ranks under the chapter of first class War Crimes. All us presidents since 1945 have engaged in such criminal activities, thereby making the outcry emanating from Washington concerning Milosevic, Castro, Sadam, Quadaffi, or Osama bin Laden perfectly ridiculous. Because, since World War II, Americans themselves have behaved as the worst terrorists in the business. Except all are afraid to call a spade a spade fearing the awesome us military and economic powers. Israel, America's closest ally, has been a steady partner in crime. Americans and Israelis think and act alike. Both nations live by the sword. us Christians and Israeli Jews feel their religious beliefs are a compass to a just world. A continuing armed pilgrimage to secure their worldwide interests seems permanent. Both nations feel they possess a God given right to use any means, including murder, assassination and terror of any kind to achieve their goals. Human rights do not figure in their policies.

[p. 122]

When Christians embarked on the liberation of the Holy land during the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries, they aimed at liberating Jerusalem inspite of the fact, that the city had been under Muslim control since the 7th century. Sharon is in charge of the holy city for now and there is no hope in sight for a peaceful resolution to existing religious obsessions on either side. Perhaps Marx was embarrassingly right when he said in 1844, the religion was ‘the sigh of the oppressed creature, the feeling of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of unspiritual conditions. It is the opium of the people.’

The 100.000 Christians marching on Constantinople in 1096 were led by Godfrey of Bouillon, Duke of Lower Lorraine. In Korea it was general Douglas Mac Arthur. In Vietnam William Westmoreland. In Kosovo Wesley Clark. They were the Dukes of Lower Lorraine of the day aiming at making the entire globe safe for the American way of life - and Wall Street, of course. The Dutch guilder is currently being annexed by the euro. What American Rogues really want is to annex the euro, rubble, yen, peso etcetera, to the dollar, transforming the world into a global Disneyland, where everybody happily chews gum, pays with dollars, speaks English and gets brainwashed by cnn.

At the same time, most Americans still want Fidel dead. Has- sidic Jews hope Sharon will kill all Arabs. The Islamic Jihad continues, because Palestinians demand total sovereignty on their soil of birth. Who would deny them this basic human right? It is far from certain that Saddam Hussein, and a few leaders like him, will allow bygones to be bygones. Israel continues a policy of selective assassination of Palestinian freedom fighters. Arabs blow themselves up causing an undetermined number of Israeli deaths to score a point. They insist on unconditional freedom. They can't do what Washington did, simply by dumping two atom-bombs on Japan to make the same point. Therefore, it looks as if mankind had better

[p. 123]

fasten its seatbelt since more Mother-of-all-Battles have to be expected before eternal peace on earth will be archieved.

Will justice without borders ever reign on our planet? Will national sovereignty some day indeed make place for a global management? Washington insists on remaking the world to its image. It is the Donovan crusaders who have to establish a pure Pax Americana, and if need be use force and strong armed methods. They have begun to stretch us Justice to personages they consider criminals, wherever they are. Of course, their own war criminals are excluded from their imperialist games. Prosecutors in The Hague are merely chasing us enemies in a nato Tribunal, based on nato Justice rendered in a nato country. How impartial can you get? Holland should not make its territory available for the cover-up of us crimes against humanity. Some day an Arab suicide bomber may use a semi nuclear device to blow up the Court in The Hague.

In the mean time, an interesting phenomenon is taking place in the realm of human rights. The un covenant of 1948 (ud) had during the Cold War shown a split along an obvious divide. ‘Capitalists were keen on civil and political rights,’ reported the London Economist (August 18, 2001) ‘Communists were keen on social and economic human rights.’ The Chinese are reasoning along similar lines. This means, that since the Cold War belongs to another century, a large chunk of humanity does not share the us way of looking at and dealing with the world. Even prestigious human rights advocates such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch seem to be entertaining second thoughts on continued placing of accent on the civil and political rights of individuals. A subtle shift towards the International Covenant on Economic, social an Cultural Rights, also adopted in 1948, seems to be taking place. In 1998, the World Health Organization , for instance, asked for the recognition of health as a human right.

The Economist also singled out ‘the oblivious Americans’ for

[p. 124]

their reject during a un summit on aids, a rights-based approach to stopping the disease. ‘Washington sees aids purely as a health policy problem, or when pressed as one of national security.’ Of course, to guarantee people political rights is relatively cheap. To protect masses by Law in the area of economic and social rights is potentially enormously costly. Even Florida voters were shortchanged, in a way that corrupted the outcome of the election in 2000 and thus sabotaged the will of the people to the advantage of Republicans. us states lack funds to supply proper voting machines to impoverished neighborhoods, where the poor live and have trouble in understanding the procedures. Leonard Rubenstein of the lobby Physicians for Human Rights in Boston, predicts, ‘that as Americans start demanding human rights for others around the world, they will start pressing for them at home as well.’ Apart from pigheadedness about all international treaties, and George Bush junior's attitude towards global warming or missile defense, us conservatives insist, that the Government blocks the setting up of an International Criminal Court in The Hague for which the Dutch Government has already set aside a huge vacant plot. Life in America has become completely intertwined with threats and counter threats of legal steps to protect oneself against sharks luring from all sides at all the times, in an effort to find loopholes by which a few bucks can be cashed in. When i hired a literary agent in New York, I was strongly advised to consult another literary lawyer to check if the agent wasn't screwing me. Those were the moments when I realized why I preferred to live in New York on a green card and never took out us citizenship. But, I confess, Holland, where I now live again, is, in this respect, also following disastrously bad American habits. Although: with my publisher for the past ten years, I never signed a contract. All my publications were agreed upon in good faith, orally by mutual trust.

[p. 125]

In America personal threats, blackmail, fearing lawsuits, seeking protection from crooks all around, is all accepted as part and parcel of trying to survive. This corrupting way of life has become totally infectious and is considered quite normal. When lawmakers in Washington use Mafia methods to pressure their government into fullfilling their wishes, they simply threaten the White House: ‘You need 582 million dollars for the United-Nations, fine, but we will vote against it, unless you first veto plans for an International Criminal Court in The Hague.’ The us as the wealthiest country in the world is one billion dollars behind in payments to the un. Washington, in turn, plays blackmail with this debt to the wold organization.

Washington's Mafia behavior in this matter doesn't even end with the threat to the un. New legislation is being introduced on Capitol Hill that exempts Americans from being prosecuted for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity by the new International Criminal Court. Bill Clinton reluctantly signed the us up. Yet, he knew, that the project would never be accepted by the us Senate. The newly designed legislation further stipulates that us military assistance will be cut off to any non-nato nation, that joins the new Hague Tribunal. It would also prohibit us troops from serving in any un peacekeeping forces, unless the Council first gives American soldiers immunity from the International Criminal Court's jurisdiction. The legislation even empowers the us president to use force to free us soldiers held for prosecution by this Court in The Hague.

Some Washington lawmakers are a danger to themselves, their country and the world. They seem to live with the absurd notion, that Bush junior would launch a paratrooper operation when - for instance - Henry Kissinger was to be arrested during a vacation on the spanish island of Ibiza, on the orders of a Spanish judge and was then to be brought to The

[p. 126]

Hague International Court for War Crimes for sentencing. Would the junior Bush set the American Bismarck free by force?

As recently as December 1993, Bill Clinton decided to no longer recognize Article 13 (2) of the un Charter, which states ‘that everyone has the right to leave any country including is own and return to his country’. However, Resolution 194 was reaffirmed in the General Assembly by 127-2, with only the us and Israel opposed. Washington joined Tel Aviv in rejecting the second half of the sentence, ‘and return to his country’, because it would give Palestinians the right to return to their homeland. The charade, that Washington should be the ‘honest broker’ to assist in promoting peace in the Middle East is totally preposterous, because Washington is completely committed to Israel, just as it is fully siding with the Albanian uck. Trouble spots - like Taiwan versus China, Kashmir versus India and Pakistan, Afghanistan versus the ussr, Cuba versus North America - are ongoing projects of the Donovan Boys, who thrive on conspiracy, murder, intrigue, and covert operations everywhere. They ARE the number one war criminals in the world. us gangsters have by their wits alone lived for half a century virtually unopposed. But the first signs are there. Mankind is at last discovering who the real evildoers are. Trigger happily as they are, they shot jfk and his brother. They created an inspiring repertoire of means and methods to get rid of numerous Americans, who were in the way. Worldwide they feel even more relaxed about putting their murderous computer games into practice.

And, while a nervous world awaits to see where they will strike next, in the Sandia national Laboratories in New Mexico, bright Donovan Boys are doing over time in the Intelligent systems and Robotics Center to invent tiny, highly maneuverable wheeled machines, that can do the jobs that until now were done by live Marines. The buggy like vehicle is

[p. 127]

about a meter long and is called a Rattler, or a robotic all-terrain lunar exploration rover, originally developed by Sandia Laboratories for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The purpose is, for instance, that these machines can clean out a building held by enemy soldiers. The robots swarm out like ants and have guns that use gas. This way it does not matter if there are also women and children in the building. ‘America's military,’ wrote mark Williams and Andrew Madden in Red Herring Magazine (August 1, 2001), ‘is the country's biggest business. According to the House Budget Committee, in 2000 defense expenditure represented 16 percent of discretionary federal spending.’ This means, of course, so discreet and secret, that most Americans have no clue as to what their tax money is being spent on. ‘It was big news,’ wrote Williams and Madden, ‘when George Bush junior said in a speech in February 2001, that he would challenge the military status quo by developing new technologies and by significantly increasing spending, for the current budget of no less than 300 billion.’

Billions of people everywhere start the 21st century with daily worries of where their next meal will come from. Many hundreds of millions of fellow men are unable to find work and barely survive in extreme poverty. They have hardly a future to look forward to, either for themselves or their loved ones. Yankees seem mostly oblivious to the despair of billions in a world they share. Developing nations owe hundreds of billions of dollars to Washington. The world's poor will never be able to meet their debts. The Club of Rome already warned in the seventies about limits to growth. Of course, everything is finite, from our very own lives to what the planet can offer in terms of food, water and resources. We must handle the earth with extreme care, particularly in view of future generations. Americans simply continue their merry ways having no idea about the plight of peoples everywhere. There is no

[p. 128]

more appropriate way to demonstrate the prevailing madness among Ugly Americans, than to conclude this report by what Washington considers absolute priorities. I am quoting the figures (in million dollars) from the us Department of Defense budget only concerning money allocated for research in advanced technology and development for the year 2001.

Pentagon information technology development	94.2
Space-based lasers	74.5
Global combat support system	72.0
Line of site anti tank weapons	26,8
Advanced tank armament system	118,1
Aircraft Avionics	42.3
Advanced development op weapons and munitions	28.7
Artillery systems	20.1
Other missile product improvement programs	64.4
Night vision systems advanced development	11.0
Distributive interactive simulations	20.7
Landmine warfare barrier	22.8
Air defense command, control and intelligence	16,5
Command, control, communication systems	49.3
scamp Block II satellite data transmission terminal	30.3
Aerospace propulsion subsystems integration	34.4
Joint tactical radio	62.2
Technical information activities	26.7
Flight vehicle technology integration	13.2
Advanced aerospace systems	26.8
Space and missile rocket propulsion	24.3
Combat feeding, clothing and equipment	86.3
Marine technology	30.3
Land warfare technology	134.2
Line-of-sight technology	50.7
Artillery systems	355.3
Comanche helicopter	614.0
Logistic systems technology	13.9
Classified defense advanced research projects	101.4

[p. 129]

This Pentagon list underscores a warning Lord Chalfont, former British Minister of Defense, sounded during an interview I had in London with him. ‘It is clearly unavoidable,’ he said, ‘to continuously invent new weapon systems and not put them to the test sooner of later.’ Of course, this is what the invisible government has been doing all along, like recently in Iraq, Yugoslavia, Sudan, Afghanistan and Columbia. Which nation and people will serve as the next Guinea-pigs for the computer playing generals in Washington?