Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

For The Record  

FTR #550 Going Native

Lis­ten:
MP3 Side 1 | Side 2
REALAUDIO

This broadcast—like the pre­ced­ing three programs—might have been titled “Strange Bed­fel­lows.” In this pro­gram, we look at the use of native, “unrep­re­sented” peo­ples by polit­i­cal ele­ments that don’t appear to be gen­uinely con­cerned with the wel­fare of those pop­u­la­tion groups. Specif­i­cally, we look at a strange brew of Tibetan Bud­dhists, Islamists and Pan-Turkists work­ing under the aus­pices of the House of Hab­s­burg in order to pre­cip­i­tate the seces­sion of Xin­jiang province from China. It is Mr. Emory’s opin­ion that the use of unrep­re­sented, “native” peo­ples by ultra-reactionary inter­ests like the Haps­burgs and the asso­ci­ated House of Liecht­en­stein is a cyn­i­cal manip­u­la­tion of these populations.

Rather than sin­cerely cham­pi­oning the inter­ests of these groups and pro­mot­ing their wel­fare, sus­te­nance and demo­c­ra­tic gov­er­nance, they appear to be using these groups as vehi­cles for the desta­bi­liza­tion and par­ti­tion­ing of larger nations—Russia and China in par­tic­u­lar. It is for the pur­poses of covert desta­bi­liza­tion that the Hab­s­burgs and its roy­al­ist ally the House of Liecht­en­stein appear to be “going native.” Are the Lakota [Sioux] being sim­i­larly tar­geted? (The Lakota are among the “unrep­re­sented” peo­ples that belong to the UNPO, headed up by Karl von Hab­s­burg and promi­nently fea­tur­ing the milieu of the Dalai Lama.) Do the Haps­burgs and their Under­ground Reich allies intend to pre­cip­i­tate a geo­graph­i­cal Balka­niza­tion of the United States? Do the appar­ent Under­ground Reich ele­ments intend to pre­cip­i­tate a bloody repres­sion of the Lakota in order to [fur­ther] dis­credit the United States? Or are the Native Americans—including the Lakota—intended to be used as what Lucy Komisar calls “off­shore elements?”

Pro­gram High­lights Include: An account of the Pan-Turkist (and Mus­lim) bas­machi upris­ings in the for­mer Soviet Union shortly after its for­ma­tion; fur­ther descrip­tion of the Uighur sep­a­ratist move­ment in Xin­jiang province of China; review of the role of the Dalai Lama and his milieu in the UNPO; review of the Dalai Lama’s asso­ci­a­tion with the Pan-Turkist and Islamist Uighur sep­a­ratist move­ment; review of the con­nec­tions of ele­ments of U.S. intel­li­gence to the Uighur sep­a­ratists in the 1970’s and 1980’s; review of the Uighur sep­a­ratist movement’s links to Al Qaeda; review of the Bush administration’s clas­si­fi­ca­tion of the Uighur sep­a­ratist move­ment as ter­ror­ist in nature; the House of Liechtenstein’s close con­nec­tions to the Hab­s­burgs; the House of Liechtenstein’s links to the Bank Al Taqwa; the links of the House of Liechtenstein’s spon­sor­ship of “self-determination” stud­ies for areas of vio­lent Islamist activ­ity (Kosovo, Kash­mir and Chech­nya); the links of the Hab­s­burgs to inter­na­tional fas­cism and the Under­ground Reich; links of the other royal fam­i­lies of Europe to fas­cism. Note that this pro­gram, per­haps more than oth­ers, is highly ref­er­enced to other pro­grams. It is emphat­i­cally rec­om­mended that lis­ten­ers use the hyper­links to other broad­casts, as well as the search func­tion to sup­ple­ment their under­stand­ing of these admit­tedly com­plex topics.

1. The pro­gram begins with review of an unin­formed (and unin­ten­tion­ally inform­ing) arti­cle by Wayne Mad­sen, a for­mer intel­li­gence agent him­self. Mad­sen notes that the Bush admin­is­tra­tion clas­si­fied the Uighur inde­pen­dence move­ment as ter­ror­ist. As can be seen in mate­r­ial that fol­lows, this is an accu­rate des­ig­na­tion. This clas­si­fi­ca­tion, like the Bush administration’s clas­si­fi­ca­tion of the Bank Al Taqwa as ter­ror­ist, is one of the rel­a­tively few things the Bush admin­is­tra­tion has done right in the war on ter­ror. In the case of the Uighur inde­pen­dence move­ment, the impe­tus to clas­sify the move­ment as ter­ror­ist may well have come from State Depart­ment intel­li­gence ele­ments. In this con­text, one should note that the national secu­rity estab­lish­ment is not mono­lithic. It appears that in the case of the Uighur inde­pen­dence move­ment and Al Taqwa, some ele­ments of U.S. intel­li­gence were func­tion­ing with effec­tive­ness and accu­racy. As we saw in FTRs 513 and 514, Bank Al Taqwa was even­tu­ally let off the hook when the United States refused to pro­vide infor­ma­tion to the Swiss, who then dropped much of their inves­ti­ga­tion of Bank Al Taqwa. Links between the royal fam­ily of Liecht­en­stein and the Bank Al Taqwa are high­lighted below. “Super­man comic book fans will fondly recall the topsy-turvy Bizarro world, a planet shaped like a cube where every­thing hap­pened back­wards and noth­ing made any sense. Wel­come now to the Bush world, where the revered Dalai Lama of Tibet may now be branded by the United States as a ‘fel­low trav­eler’ of ter­ror­ists or, worse yet, an ‘enemy com­bat­ant.’ On August 27, Deputy Sec­re­tary of State Richard Armitage, a shad­owy ex-Special Forces offi­cer who has been linked to every­thing from heroin smug­gling in Burma’s Golden Tri­an­gle to smug­gling weapons to the Iran­ian regime of Aya­tol­lah Khome­ini, met with senior Chi­nese offi­cials in Bei­jing. Accord­ing to Reuters, Armitage, rep­re­sent­ing the world’s sec­ond largest total­i­tar­ian regime, told the lead­er­ship of the world’s largest one that the State Depart­ment had added a new group to its list of for­eign ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tions: the move­ment seek­ing inde­pen­dence for west­ern China’s Sinkiang region, an area that Chi­nese Uighur (pro­nounced ‘wee-ger’) Mus­lims regard as East Turkestan or Uighurstan. The only prob­lem with this des­ig­na­tion, obvi­ously designed to please the Chi­nese regime prior to the upcom­ing Octo­ber sum­mit in Wash­ing­ton between Chi­nese Vice Pres­i­dent Hu Jin­tao and Pres­i­dent Bush, is that the new ‘ter­ror­ist group’ is a mem­ber of the same non-government orga­ni­za­tion as the Dalai Lama’s Tibetan government-in-exile, the Unrep­re­sented Nations and Peo­ples Orga­ni­za­tion (UNPO), offi­cially rec­og­nized by the United Nations as an inter­na­tional human rights orga­ni­za­tion. . . .“
(“Bush’s Bizarro World” by Wayne Mad­sen; Coun­ter­punch; 8/29/2002.)

2. Madsen’s strik­ing naivete (if that’s what it is) con­cern­ing Alptekin, the Dalai Lama and the UNPO exem­pli­fies the dynamic noted by Christo­pher Hitchens. ” . . . In fact, Erkin Alptekin, East Turkestan’s exiled leader serves as Sec­re­tary Gen­eral of UNPO, and thus, rep­re­sents the Dalai Lama and other eth­nic and tribal lead­ers of 52 mem­bers of the orga­ni­za­tion. The Direc­tor Gen­eral of UNPO, hardly a ter­ror­ist, is Karl von Hab­s­burg of the for­mer Austro-Hungarian royal fam­ily. Last Sep­tem­ber 12, Alptekin, America’s newest ‘ter­ror­ist,’ stated in a let­ter to Pres­i­dent Bush, ‘UNPO is greatly shocked and sad­dened by the immense destruc­tion, injury, and loss of life which have occurred in New York, Wash­ing­ton DC and else­where in the United States, as a result of deadly acts of ter­ror­ism.’ But now Alptekin’s move­ment has been tossed into the same cat­e­gory as Al Qaeda and Hamas and its Tibetan and Chechen allies now risk sim­i­lar treat­ment at the hands of a U.S. admin­is­tra­tion that could be legit­i­mately ruled by any psy­chi­a­trist as clin­i­cally insane.” (Idem.)

3. Note that Mad­sen him­self (for what­ever rea­son) gave money to the UNPO!! Another impor­tant point to note here is the fact that the Lakota are among the “unrep­re­sented” peo­ples cham­pi­oned by the UNPO. Later on in the pro­gram, we will exam­ine the pos­si­bil­ity that the Lakota may be tar­geted for some type of covert oper­a­tion, per­haps even the desta­bi­liza­tion and/or geo­graph­i­cal dis­so­lu­tion of the United States itself! “East Turkestan is rep­re­sented inter­na­tion­ally by a num­ber of orga­ni­za­tions, now being linked by Armitage to ter­ror­ism. They include the East­ern Turkestan National Con­gress, based in Munich, Ger­many, and affil­i­ated groups in Istan­bul, Turkey; Bishkek, Kyr­gyzs­tan; Almaty, Kaza­khstan; and New York. With Armitage’s announce­ment, all these Uighur groups face sanc­tions and depor­ta­tion. Under the terms of the USA Patriot Act and other U.S. crim­i­nal statutes, the State Department’s arbi­trary des­ig­na­tion of a group as a ‘for­eign ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tion’ has severe ram­i­fi­ca­tions. Peo­ple who con­tribute to such orga­ni­za­tions and finan­cial insti­tu­tions who han­dle trans­ac­tions for such orga­ni­za­tions can face crim­i­nal pros­e­cu­tion. Any­one who con­tributes money, lodg­ing, expert assis­tance, trans­porta­tion or other ‘mate­r­ial sup­port’ to such orga­ni­za­tions can face long prison terms and seizure of their assets. Res­i­dent aliens in the United States can be deported, or worse, be declared enemy com­bat­ants and wind up on a one-way flight to Guan­tanamo Bay, Cuba. In fact, this writer once con­tributed money to UNPO. . . . Even native Amer­i­cans are no longer safe from renewed Fed­eral sub­ju­ga­tion. One of the mem­bers of UNPO is the Sioux Lakota Nation, the scene of past bloody bat­tles between encroach­ing Fed­eral troops and FBI agent and the Sioux. [Empha­sis added.] . . .” (Idem.)

4. Pro­vid­ing back­ground infor­ma­tion about Pan-Turkist and Islamist sep­a­ratism inside of the for­mer Soviet Union, the broad­cast high­lights the bas­machi upris­ing in the for­mer Soviet Union. This event helped shape the ongo­ing effort at uti­liz­ing Pan-Turkist and Islamist ele­ments to break off pieces of China and (in the case of Chech­nya among other regions) Rus­sia as well. NOTE THAT XINJIANG PROVINCE IS RICH IN PETROLEUM AND OTHER RESOURCES. THIS NO DOUBT MAKES IT A VERY ATTRACTIVE TARGET TO POWERFUL CORPORATE INTERESTS. “The first seri­ous Islamic upris­ing against the Sovi­ets in Cen­tral Asia occurred in 1918. Trad­ing in a Czarist for a com­mu­nist yoke was def­i­nitely a bad deal for Cen­tral Asia’s Mus­lims. A month after their Octo­ber 1917 vic­tory far to the north, the Bol­she­viks sent a detach­ment to seize the impor­tant regional capi­tol of Tashkent. The new com­mis­sars began by req­ui­si­tion­ing all the food they could lay their hands on and seiz­ing the cot­ton crop in the name of the people’s repub­lic. A famine soon fol­lowed that would kill as many as a mil­lion Cen­tral Asians. In Feb­ru­ary 1918, Bol­she­vik troops put down a revolt in the ancient Uzbek car­a­van city of Kokand, sack­ing and slaugh­ter­ing as they went, and the bas­machi revolt was on. While the Bol­she­viks were occu­pied by con­sol­i­dat­ing their vic­tory else­where in the Soviet Union, the upris­ing spread. Vic­tory fol­lowed on vic­tory. At its height, the rebel­lion counted maybe twenty thou­sand sol­diers in its ranks, most of them peas­ant fight­ers, all of them Mus­lims. The end, though, seemed fore­or­dained. The com­mu­nists out­num­bered the bas­machi; they had heavy weapons; and after the White Rus­sians were defeated, the rebels got the Reds’ full atten­tion. By 1920, the bas­machi had been dri­ven back into the moun­tains of Tajik­istan. That’s when Enver Pasha showed up.“
(Sleep­ing with the Devil; by Robert Baer; Copy­right 2003 by Robert Baer; Three Rivers Press [SC]; ISBN 1–400-5268–8; p. 131.)

5. Note that the min­is­ter of war for the Ottoman Empire dur­ing World War I played an impor­tant role in moti­vat­ing the Pan-Turkist ele­ments that attempted to break off from the Soviet Union. “Turkey’s min­is­ter of war dur­ing World War I, Enver Pasha fled to Berlin after the defeat of the Cen­tral Pow­ers, and then went to Moscow at Lenin’s invi­ta­tion. Lenin wanted to use the charis­matic Turk to draw Cen­tral Asia’s Mus­lims into the Soviet fold, but as it turned out, Pasha had a grander vision: a pan-Turkic state that would stretch from the Straits of Bosporus to Mon­go­lia. He was only thirty-two. In Feb­ru­ary 1922, Pasha cap­tured Dushanbe, the cap­i­tal of mod­ern Tajik­istan. By the end of spring, he had taken con­trol of vir­tu­ally all of the emi­rate of Bokhara. In July 1922, the Sovi­ets were forced to react to Pasha’s treach­ery and sent a divi­sion south to stop him. It worked. He was killed in bat­tle on August 4 of that year. But the bas­machi wouldn’t be com­pletely snuffed out until 1934. Some of the rebels, it was thought, holed up in the remote moun­tain val­leys of Tajik­istan. Most took refuge in Afghanistan. More than a few slipped as far away as Saudi Ara­bia. Some took up res­i­dence in Mecca and became dyed-in-the-wool Wah­habis.” (Ibid.; pp. 131–132.)

6. Next, the pro­gram fleshes out infor­ma­tion about the sep­a­ratist move­ment in Xin­jiang province, China. Note that both Islamist and non-theocratic Pan-Turkist ele­ments are involved in this move­ment. “China has not been spared. Xin­jiang (south­ern China), has a pop­u­la­tion that is 55% Uighur (a Turko­phone Sunni eth­nic group); it has been con­fronted with Islamist vio­lence since the begin­ning of the 1990’s. Cre­ated in 1955, Xin­jiang (which means ‘new ter­ri­tory’) is one of the five autonomous areas of China and is the largest admin­is­tra­tive unit of the coun­try. The area is highly strate­gic at the geopo­lit­i­cal level — Chi­nese nuclear tests and rocket launches take place on the Lop Nor test grounds — as well as from an eco­nomic stand­point, since it abounds in nat­ural wealth (oil, gas, ura­nium, gold, etc.). Against this back­drop, attacks have pro­lif­er­ated by independence-seeking cliques, all preach­ing ‘Holy War.’”
(Dol­lars for Ter­ror: The United States and Islam; by Richard Labeviere; Copy­right 2000; Algora Press [SC]; ISBN 1–822941-06–6; p. 10.)

7. “Some are act­ing in the name of Turk­ish iden­tity, while oth­ers are fight­ing in the name of Allah (espe­cially in the south­ern part of the region). As in the rest of Cen­tral Asia, in Xin­jiang we are wit­ness­ing the ris­ing influ­ence of Wah­habi groups and the increas­ing pros­e­lytism of preach­ers from Saudi Ara­bia, Afghanistan and Pak­istan. Tra­di­tion­ally allied with pop­u­lar China, Pak­istan is nev­er­the­less try­ing to extend its influ­ence to this part of China, using the Islamists as it did in Afghanistan. For this rea­son Bei­jing closed the road from Karako­rum, con­nect­ing Xin­jiang to Pak­istan, between 1992 and 1995. Since 1996, the fre­quency of the inci­dents has sky­rock­eted. In Feb­ru­ary 1997, riots exploded in Yin­ing (a town of 300,000 inhab­i­tants located to the west of Urumqi, near the Kazakh bor­der). This vio­lence caused ten deaths, accord­ing to Chi­nese author­i­ties, and the Uighurs have counted more than a hun­dred vic­tims.” (Idem.)

8. “Every week in 1998 saw a bomb­ing or an attack with auto­matic weapons. The region’s hotels, air­ports and rail­way sta­tions are in a con­stant state of alert. In April, Chi­nese author­i­ties in the vicin­ity of Yin­ing seized 700 cases of ammu­ni­tion from Kaza­khstan. In Sep­tem­ber, the Sec­re­tary of the Xin­jiang Com­mu­nist Party declared that ’19 train­ing camps, in which spe­cial­ists return­ing from Afghanistan edu­cate young recruits in the tech­niques of ter­ror­ism, with the assis­tance of the Tale­ban,’ were neu­tral­ized. In Jan­u­ary 1999, 29 activists impli­cated in the Feb­ru­ary 1997 riots were arrested. On Feb­ru­ary 12, vio­lent clashes between the police and groups of Uighur mil­i­tants wounded sev­eral dozen peo­ple in Urumqi. Two hun­dred peo­ple were arrested. In early March, 10,000 addi­tional sol­diers arrived at Yin­ing to beef up secu­rity, while in Bei­jing, the Uighur Islamist orga­ni­za­tions took credit for sev­eral bomb attacks.” (Ibid.; pp. 10–11.)

9. “This Asian test-bed is sup­port­ing the emer­gence of a new type of rad­i­cal­ism. Sunni-ite and ide­o­log­i­cally con­ser­v­a­tive, it is supra­na­tional in its recruit­ment and in its ide­ol­ogy. It does not emanate out of scis­sions in the great Islamists orga­ni­za­tions, but from a rad­i­cal­iza­tion of the Afghan Tale­bans, from their sanc­tu­ar­ies and their ties with small ter­ror­ist and mafia groups, mar­gin­al­ized and rad­i­cal­ized by repres­sion (as in Egypt and Alge­ria), in a con­text of eco­nomic and finan­cial glob­al­iza­tion, as well as from the cir­cu­la­tion of mil­i­tants who have lost their ter­ri­to­ries. The prin­ci­pal char­ac­ter­is­tic of these net­works (except in Cen­tral Asia and Egypt) is that they recruit, estab­lish their bases, and act at the mar­gins of the Arab-Muslim world. In addi­tion to the Egyp­tians, Pak­ista­nis, Sudanese, Yemenites, and Fil­ipinos, recently there has been a wave of immi­gra­tion to Great Britain and the United States. Oper­a­tions take place in Egypt, cer­tainly, in Alge­ria and Cen­tral Asia, but also in the east and the south of Africa, in Yemen, Bangladesh, New York, etc. The favorite ‘holy wars’ are Kash­mir, Afghanistan, Chech­nya, the Cau­ca­sus and, now, China.” (Ibid.; p. 11.)

10. Note the role that Islamists play in the multi­na­tional cor­po­rate glob­al­iza­tion move­ment. They are work­ing in a fash­ion that dimin­ishes national con­trol and reg­u­la­tion and accen­tu­ates laissez-faire mar­ket dynam­ics. (“Lib­er­al­ism” in the con­text pre­sented here means “free-market” rather than tra­di­tional Amer­i­can polit­i­cal lib­er­al­ism.) “Tak­ing advan­tage of eco­nomic lib­er­al­iza­tion, many for­mer chiefs of the ‘holy war’ have now trans­muted into busi­ness­men. They make up an ‘Islamo-business’ world that has colonies in var­i­ous sec­tors: Islamic finan­cial insti­tu­tions, Islamic gar­ment indus­tries, human­i­tar­ian and benev­o­lent orga­ni­za­tions, pri­vate schools, and so on. As polit­i­cal sci­en­tist Olivier Roy says, ‘Today’s Islamic actors are work­ing for lib­er­al­ism and against state con­trol.’ They rep­re­sent a glob­al­iza­tion of Islam, deter­ri­to­ri­al­ized, in an approach that has been uncou­pled from the Mid­dle East. A strik­ing West­ern­iza­tion of Islamism is tak­ing place or, more pre­cisely, of the tra­di­tion­ally infra-state net­works; tribes, Koran schools, etc. are link­ing up with world­wide net­works that func­tion in an extremely mod­ern way and out­side the con­trol of any State author­ity. This evo­lu­tion results from a his­tory that began long ago...” (Idem.)

11. The broad­cast reviews the fact that the Dalai Lama has col­lab­o­rated with Islamists from among the Uighur pop­u­la­tion of Xin­jiang province of China. (The Uighurs refer to Xin­jiang as East or East­ern Turkestan.) With Xin­jiang province being rich in petro­leum, the Uighurs have had lit­tle trou­ble obtain­ing sup­port from for­eign intel­li­gence ser­vices. For addi­tional infor­ma­tion about Uighur involve­ment with the Mus­lim Brotherhood/Al Qaeda milieu, see FTR#348 as well as FTR#549. It should be noted that we are a long way from deal­ing with “Bud­dhists” here!! The Dalai Lama’s milieu is part of a larger Under­ground Reich “vir­tual state.” It is also impor­tant to bear in mind that the milieu of which the Dalai Lama is a part appears to focus on Cen­tral Asia—that part of the “Earth Island” seen by geopoliti­cians as key to con­trol­ling that land mass and, as a con­se­quence, the world. Note that the Uighurs are counted by the Pan-Turkists as among the “out­side Turks” to be included in a “Greater Turkestan”. “India should have rea­sons to be con­cerned over the Dalai Lama’s hob­nob­bing with the pan– Islamic ele­ments in Xin­jiang. One can­not avoid sus­pect­ing that the influ­ence of these ele­ments must have been behind his par­tic­i­pa­tion in a con­fer­ence orga­nized in Chen­nai last year by some ele­ments, which have been act­ing as apol­o­gists for Gen. Per­vez Mushar­raf, the Pak­istani mil­i­tary dic­ta­tor, which was attended by a rep­re­sen­ta­tive of the Huryiat of J&K and a large num­ber of Pak­ista­nis, some of them retired Pak­istani mil­i­tary offi­cers. The Dalai Lama’s set-up sub­se­quently denied or played down some of the con­tro­ver­sial remarks attrib­uted to him at the con­fer­ence. The Gov­ern­ment of India should con­sider con­vey­ing to the Dalai Lama its unhap­pi­ness and con­cern over his asso­ci­a­tion with pan-Islamic ele­ments in Xin­jiang.“
(“US & Ter­ror­ism in Xin­jiang” by B. Raman; From the web­site of the South Asia Analy­sis Group [an Indian intelligence/national secu­rity think tank]; 7/02.)

12. Note that the U.S. has main­tained a dou­ble stan­dard on Islamist and sep­a­ratist ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tions. Those per­ceived as “purely indige­nous” are not clas­si­fied as ter­ror­ist, and may be receiv­ing assis­tance from ele­ments of the intel­li­gence com­mu­nity that are at least nom­i­nally Amer­i­can. It is Mr. Emory’s view that this ele­ment of the intel­li­gence com­mu­nity is asso­ci­ated with the petro­leum indus­try and, at a more pro­found level, the Under­ground Reich. It appears that this same ele­ment (or related ele­ments) is at the epi­cen­ter of the drug-trafficking milieu within U.S. intel­li­gence. For lis­ten­ers who might find this dif­fi­cult to under­stand, con­sider the sit­u­a­tion vis a vis drug-trafficking. Some ele­ments of U.S. intel­li­gence are com­plicit in the drug traf­fick­ing, while other ele­ments (in con­junc­tion with law enforce­ment) are sin­cerely active in oppos­ing it. Not only are the ter­ror­ist and drug-trafficking sit­u­a­tions anal­o­gous, but, again, the drug-trafficking ele­ments are asso­ci­ated with the ter­ror­ist ele­ments. As researcher Peter Dale Scott has illus­trated in his work [Drugs, Oil and War], the terror/drug ele­ment is closely asso­ci­ated with the petro­leum indus­try. This ele­ment of the intel­li­gence com­mu­nity may well be part of the “Safari Club” milieu.

More on the Uighur involve­ment with Al Qaeda: “10. The Islamic Move­ment of Uzbek­istan and the Abu Sayyaf of the south­ern Philip­pines have been des­ig­nated as For­eign Ter­ror­ist Orga­ni­za­tions under the US law of 1996, but not the East­ern Turkestan Islamic Party, though all the three are mem­bers of Osama bin Laden’s Inter­na­tional Islamic Front For Jehad Against the USA and Israel. In ini­ti­at­ing action, either for des­ig­na­tion as a For­eign Ter­ror­ist Orga­ni­za­tion or for action under the UN Secu­rity Coun­cil Res­o­lu­tion No, 1373 in respect of bank accounts, the US and the Euro­pean Union have focused essen­tially on ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tions, which are per­ceived by them as inter­na­tional in nature or which are seen as pos­ing a threat to their nation­als and inter­ests. Ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tions viewed by them as purely indige­nous have been excluded. These mul­ti­ple yard­sticks have been used vis– a-vis China as well as India.” (Idem.)

13. Note that both the Islamist ele­ment of the Uighur inde­pen­dence move­ment and its more sec­u­lar Pan-Turkist allies have col­lab­o­rated with the Dalai Lama. “7. Uighurs were found fight­ing with al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. We are aware of cred­i­ble reports that some Uighurs who were trained by al-Qaeda have returned to China. . . .24. The sec­ond sim­i­lar­ity relates to the exter­nal causes of aggra­va­tion of the ter­ror­ist vio­lence in Xin­jiang. Just as in J & K, in Xin­jiang too, there are two dis­tinct terrorist/extremist move­ments– –one resort­ing to vio­lence on eth­nic grounds to assert the Uighur eth­nic iden­tity against the per­ceived Han Chi­nese dom­i­na­tion and the other using reli­gious and pan-Islamic argu­ments to jus­tify vio­lence for the estab­lish­ment of an inde­pen­dent Islamic State. While the eth­nic sep­a­ratist ele­ments have been the ben­e­fi­cia­ries of sym­pa­thy and sup­port from the Dalai Lama’s set-up and the Tibetan dias­pora abroad, and the US, Tai­wanese and Turk­ish intel­li­gence agen­cies, the reli­gious fun­da­men­tal­ist ele­ments have been in receipt of sup­port from the Inter-Services Intel­li­gence (ISI)-backed jehadi orga­ni­za­tions in Pak­istan, the Tal­iban and bin Laden’s Inter­na­tional Islamic Front For Jehad Against the USA and Israel.” (Idem.)

14. Accord­ing to the Raman paper, the CIA had close con­nec­tions to Erkin Alptekin, a mem­ber of the board of the Dalai Lama foun­da­tion and a func­tionary of the move­ment to estab­lish Xin­jiang province of China as an inde­pen­dent (Mus­lim) Uighur state—East Turkestan. It should be noted that Alptekin is an oper­a­tive of the Pan-Turkist move­ment, which is dis­tinct from the Islamist ele­ment in the Uighur inde­pen­dence move­ment. The Pan-Turkist move­ment is dis­cussed at length in AFA#‘s 14 and 21, avail­able from Spit­fire. “25. In the 1970s and the 1980s, the Cen­tral Intel­li­gence Agency (CIA) of the USA had built up a net­work of con­tacts with the Uighur sep­a­ratist ele­ments and some of those, who had in the past worked for the Munich-based Radio Lib­erty of the CIA such as Erkin Alptekin, chair­man of the Europe-based East­ern Turkestani Union and a close Uighur asso­ciate of the Dalai Lama, are now in the fore­front of the eth­nic sep­a­ratist move­ment. . . .” (Idem.)

15. In addi­tion to his back­ground with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty—both closely con­nected to U.S. intelligence—Erkin Alptekin is a founder and key mem­ber of the UNPO, about which we will have more to say below. Alptekin is also on the board of the Dalai Lama Foun­da­tion. “ERKIN ALPTEKIN is one of the fore­most human rights advo­cates for the Uighur peo­ple of East­ern Turkestan, also known as the Xin­jiang Autonomous Region of the People’s Repub­lic of China. Mr. Alptekin was employed by Radio Free Europe/Radio Lib­erty from 1971 to 1994. He is one of the founders of the Unrep­re­sented Nations and People’s Orga­ni­za­tion (UNPO), and cur­rently serves as its gen­eral sec­re­tary.“
(Excerpt from the list of the board of the Dalai Lama Foun­da­tion.)

16. Another board mem­ber of the Dalai Lama Foun­da­tion is a mem­ber of the UNPO. Again, this will be dis­cussed at greater length below. “MICHAEL VAN WALT cur­rently serves as Exec­u­tive Pres­i­dent of the Peace Action Coun­cil, and Legal Advi­sor to the Office of H.H. The Dalai Lama. From 1991 to 1998 Dr. Van Walt was Gen­eral Sec­re­tary of UNPO, the Unrep­re­sented Nations and Peo­ples Orga­ni­za­tion. Dr. Van Walt holds law degrees from Europe and Amer­ica, and is cur­rently Adjunct Pro­fes­sor of Inter­na­tional Law, Golden Gate Uni­ver­sity School of Law, San Fran­cisco.” (Idem.)

17. With the Dalai Lama and his milieu, we appear to be look­ing at man­i­fes­ta­tions of the Under­ground Reich as a “vir­tual state”—a state with­out for­mal geo­graph­i­cal bor­ders. We should also note that Cen­tral Asia—the area that is the focal point of the Dalai Lama’s and UNPO’s sup­port for Uighur sep­a­ratist ele­ments was viewed by geopoliti­cians as crit­i­cal for main­tain­ing con­trol of the Earth Island. “The eldest son and heir of the dynasty is Karl (Karl’s web­site), who lives in Aus­tria and has served in the Aus­trian army and was a mem­ber of the Euro­pean Par­lia­ment, like his father, from 1996–1999. [Empha­sis added.] He has worked hard to keep the fam­ily in the pub­lic lime­light, even host­ing a pop­u­lar tele­vi­sion game show. He works qui­etly to change the Aus­trian laws of 1919 that for­bid the Hab­s­burgs from hold­ing any polit­i­cal office and has often been men­tioned as a pos­si­ble Chan­cel­lor of the Aus­trian Repub­lic. At this time he is the Gen­eraldirek­tor of the UNPO (Unrep­re­sented Nations and Peo­ples Orga­ni­za­tion). In 1993 Karl mar­ried Francesca Thyssen-Bornemisza who is well known in Euro­pean high soci­ety.” (Entry for Karl von Habsburg)

18. The broad­cast sets forth the fas­cist incli­na­tions of Otto von Hab­s­burg, the aging patri­arch of that fam­ily and the father of Karl von Hab­s­burg. (Younger lis­ten­ers should note that Rudolph Hess was one of Hitler’s clos­est aides and the last pris­oner at Span­dau prison.) ” . . . The final esca­la­tion was reserved for Otto von Hab­s­burg, a CSU del­e­gate to the Euro­pean par­lia­ment and the son of the last Aus­trian emperor; since 1973 he has also been pres­i­dent of the ultra-right Pan-Europa-Union and a mem­ber of the Free­dom for Rudolf Hess Com­mit­tee [Empha­sis added.] . . . .“
(The New Reich: Vio­lent Extrem­ism in Uni­fied Ger­many and Beyond; by Michael Schmidt; Copy­right 1993 by Michael Schmidt; Pan­theon Books [HC]; ISBN 0–679-42578–0; p. 137.)

19. Otto von Hab­s­burg is very close to the World Secu­rity Net­work. Note the biog­ra­phy of the elder von Hab­s­burg on the World Secu­rity Network’s web site. One should also be aware of the inter­view with Hab­s­burg on their web site. The World Secu­rity Net­work appears to be an organ of the Under­ground Reich, and is very close to the milieu of the Schmitz fam­ily—Joseph E. Schmitz is on their advi­sory board. Schmitz is also among the con­tribut­ing authors of the net­work: http://www.worldsecuritynetwork.com/network/dsp_author3.cfm. Joseph E. Schmitz and his brother John P. Schmitz are dis­cussed at length in FTR#‘s 469, 476, 529. Note their appar­ent con­nec­tions to the milieu of the Under­ground Reich and 9/11.

20. Otto von Habsburg’s son and heir to the Hab­s­burg throne, Karl von Hab­s­burg, mar­ried Francesca Thyssen-Bornemisza in the Zagreb (Croa­tia) cathe­dral. The Thyssen-Bornemisza fam­ily is at the epi­cen­ter of the Thyssen indus­trial empire, the Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work and the Under­ground Reich. (The infor­ma­tion about the Habsburg/Thyssen-Bornemisza mar­riage was orig­i­nally sourced at a gene­o­log­i­cal web­site.)

21. The fas­cist incli­na­tions of the Hab­s­burgs are not unique among Euro­pean monar­chi­cal fam­i­lies. “It is more than eerie. A dis­turb­ing side­bar to the polit­i­cal cul­ture of these restora­tions was how many of the would-be mon­archs, royal houses, and sup­port­ing fac­tions had been on the fas­cist side in World War II. Italy’s House of Savoy was ban­ished in part for back­ing Mus­solini and sup­port­ing his 1938 race laws, tar­get­ing Jews. In Bul­garia, Simeon’s House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha fought through much of the war as an ally of Nazi Ger­many. The Ser­bian fac­tions back­ing the poten­tial Alexan­der II evoked mem­o­ries of World War II mas­sacres and eth­nic bat­tles still com­mem­o­rated after six hun­dred years. The Roman­ian House of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, sup­ported by the Iron Guard move­ment that blended rural East­ern Ortho­dox reli­gion with folk­ish nation­al­ism, fought most of World War II on Hitler’s side.“
(Amer­i­can Dynasty: Aris­toc­racy, For­tune, and the Pol­i­tics of Deceit in the House of Bush; by Kevin Philips; Viking [HC]; Copy­right 2004 by Kevin Phillips; ISBN 0–670-03264–6; pp. 63–64.)

22. In the para­graph that fol­lows, Phillips remarks on the impe­tus given to what he calls “aristophilia” by eco­nomic forces. In the con­text of this broad­cast, it is impor­tant to under­score the fact that the “Earth Island” and the parts of it appar­ently tar­geted for covert oper­a­tions by the roy­al­ist net­works dis­cussed here are rich in petro­leum and other nat­ural resources. Because of that, it is not unrea­son­able to sup­pose that intel­li­gence ele­ments asso­ci­ated with major corporations—oil com­pa­nies in particular—may very well be involved in the desta­bi­liza­tion efforts in Xin­jiang and (per­haps) in Chech­nya and other parts of the for­mer Soviet Union in par­tic­u­lar. “Unfair as it may be to lump together the Houses of Karad­jord­je­vic, Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Savoy, and Honenzollern-Sigmaringen, they sug­gest the dark side of the global polit­i­cal force that has buoyed dynasty and restora­tion. The anal­ogy to the English-speaking nations is obvi­ously lim­ited, but the caveats can­not be entirely ignored. And now, we must turn to the dif­fer­ent encour­age­ment given to aristophilia dur­ing the 1980’s and 1990’s by eco­nomic forces. . . .” (Ibid.; p. 64.)

23. Delv­ing into the nature of the royal fam­ily of Liecht­en­stein, the pro­gram notes the close­ness between Hans-Adam II’s clan and the Hab­s­burg dynasty that ruled the Austro-Hungarian Empire until the end of World War I. “LADISLAV KAHOUN: To what degree does your fam­ily feel spir­i­tu­ally akin to the Hab­s­burg dynasty? Do you know that in the Czech and Mora­vian aware­ness you were always con­sid­ered the house clos­est to the Hab­s­burg dynasty? PRINCE HANS-ADAM II: My grand­mother was a sis­ter of the Arch­duke Franz Fer­di­nand who was killed in Sara­jevo. This is per­haps the rea­son why in the Czech and Mora­vian aware­ness the Liecht­en­stein house is con­sid­ered the clos­est to the Hab­s­burg dynasty. His­tor­i­cally one has to say that the Liecht­en­stein fam­ily became a for­eign dynasty with the end of the Holy Roman Empire and were there­fore quite close to the Hab­s­burg dynasty. A num­ber of those for­eign dynas­ties kept prop­er­ties in the Austrian-Hungarian Empire after 1806 as the Liecht­en­steins did. They were also very often closer related to the Hab­s­burg dynasty through marriage—just think about Empress Sissi, the wife of Emperor Franz Joseph II. . . .“
(Inter­view with Prince Hans-Adam II by Ladislav Kahoun.)

24. Next, the broad­cast reviews infor­ma­tion from FTR#442. One of the most impor­tant con­nec­tions illus­trated in this pro­gram is the evi­den­tiary trib­u­tary con­nect­ing the Bank Al Taqwa and the royal fam­ily of Liecht­en­stein. Recall that Bank Al Taqwa is a prin­ci­pal finan­cial source for Al Qaeda and other Mus­lim Broth­er­hood off­shoots. One should not for­get that Al Taqwa itself orig­i­nates from a firm estab­lished in Vaduz, Liechtenstein—that nation’s cap­i­tal. Liecht­en­stein is one of the prin­ci­pal “funny money” cen­ters of Europe, and an appar­ent major pivot point for the Under­ground Reich and the asso­ci­ated Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work. This infor­ma­tion should be eval­u­ated against the back­ground of the infor­ma­tion pre­sented in FTR#‘s 352, 357, 359, 377, 378. Those broad­casts high­light the inter­sec­tion between the Al Taqwa milieu and Euro­pean far-right inter­ests, includ­ing the P-2 and Alleanza Nationale milieu in Italy. These links with pow­er­ful Euro­pean cap­i­tal inter­ests and far-right net­works indi­cate that there is much more going on here than just Islamic fun­da­men­tal­ism. In light of the links between Liecht­en­stein, Crown/Alpha (Nor­bert Seeger) and the Carl Duis­berg Gesellschaft, the Asat Trust/Liechtenstein royal fam­ily con­nec­tion assumes poten­tially larger sig­nif­i­cance. (For more about these inter­ests and their links to 9/11, see FTR#‘s 530, 536.) Do the var­i­ous ten­drils of the crea­ture por­trayed in this pro­gram descrip­tion con­sti­tute a Bormann/Underground Reich net­work deeply involved in 9/11?! ” . . . The pros­e­cu­tion also alleged that [alleged Al Qaeda financier Soli­man] Biheiri is linked to a secre­tive finan­cial net­work in Switzer­land and Liecht­en­stein called Al Taqwa, which Amer­i­can and Euro­pean inves­ti­ga­tors say is a finan­cial backer of the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood. The Broth­er­hood, often depicted as the ide­o­log­i­cal par­ent of most rad­i­cal Islamic groups, recently has come under gov­ern­ment scrutiny for its pos­si­ble direct role in sup­port­ing ter­ror­ism, most promi­nently because of Al Taqwa.“
(“Ter­ror Fund Trail Leads to Alpine King­dom” by Marc Perel­man; For­ward; 10/17/2003; p. 2)

25. A brief review of Bank Al Taqwa’s links to the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood and Al Qaeda: “The Bush admin­is­tra­tion and the United Nations have des­ig­nated the Al Taqwa net­work and its main officials—two self-avowed Mus­lim Broth­ers and an admit­ted Nazi sympathizer—as sup­port­ers of Al Qaeda. As a result, their assets have been frozen and they are the focus of a Swiss inves­ti­ga­tion. The Al Taqwa offi­cials have repeat­edly rejected the charges. At the [alleged Al Qaeda financier Soli­man] Biheiri deten­tion hear­ing last month, pros­e­cu­tor Steven Ward described Biheiri as the Mus­lim Brotherhood’s ‘finan­cial toe­hold in the U.S.’” (Idem.)

26. “The pros­e­cu­tion said it had estab­lished links between [alleged Al Qaeda financier Soli­man] Biheiri and the two prin­ci­pals of Al Taqwa, Youssef Nada and Ghaleb Him­mat. Accord­ing to tes­ti­mony from spe­cial agent Kane of the Bureau of Immi­gra­tion and Cus­toms Enforce­ment, the addresses of Nada and Him­mat were found in Biheiri’s lap­top com­puter. Kane told the court that there were ‘other indi­ca­tions’ of con­nec­tions between al Taqwa and Biheiri’s com­pany BMI, includ­ing finan­cial trans­ac­tions. . . .” (Idem.)

27. The Liecht­en­stein royal family’s involve­ment with Al Taqwa cen­ters on Asat Trust. “. . . One com­pany in the Al Taqwa galaxy that was des­ig­nated by the United States and the U.N. as a terrorist-related entity is a Liecht­en­stein entity called Asat Trust. Its direc­tor Mar­tin Wachter, told the For­ward this year that Asat Trust oper­ates merely as a reg­istry for busi­nesses and is not involved in the oper­a­tion of any com­pany. He added that the Amer­i­can gov­ern­ment had wrong­fully des­ig­nated Asat Trust as a terrorist-related entity because it had once rep­re­sented Al Taqwa in a small real estate deal in Switzer­land.” (Ibid.; pp. 2–3.)

28. Asat Trust’s involve­ment with Bank Al Taqwa is more sig­nif­i­cant than its apol­o­gists have main­tained: “Still, copies of busi­ness reg­is­tra­tion doc­u­ments on file with author­i­ties in Liecht­en­stein show that Asat Trust has been inti­mately involved with the Al Taqwa net­work dur­ing the last 30 years, reg­is­ter­ing changes in com­pany names, per­son­nel and finan­cial struc­ture, which may explain why Asat Trust landed on the Amer­i­can and U.N. ter­ror­ist lists.” (Ibid.; p. 3.)

29. The infor­ma­tion about the Al Taqwa links with the royal fam­ily of Liecht­en­stein is set forth as fol­lows: “The records also shed light on the involve­ment of one mem­ber of the royal fam­ily of Liecht­en­stein in Asat Trust. Accord­ing to the doc­u­ments, deceased Prince Emanuel von und zu Liecht­en­stein became a board mem­ber of Asat Trust in May 1970 and stayed until Novem­ber 1990, when he was replaced by Wachter, the trust’s cur­rent direc­tor. Flo­rian Krenkel, a spokesman for the royal fam­ily, said Prince Emmanuel had died in 1987 and that he was a dis­tant cousin from rul­ing Prince Hans Adam II. . . .” (Idem.)

30. In addi­tion, a bank owned by the Liecht­en­stein royal fam­ily appears to have been involved with Al Taqwa/Asat Trust’s oper­a­tions. WHY? ” . . . There also appears to be some links between Asat Trust and a bank owned by the Liecht­en­stein royal fam­ily. Sev­eral Asat Trust doc­u­ments fea­ture on their let­ter­heads ‘Bank in Liecht­en­stein AG’ beneath ‘Asat Trust.’ The royal fam­ily bank has changed its name and is now called LGT bank. A tele­phone and an e-mail query to the bank’s spokesman Hans-Martin Uehringer went unre­turned. . . .” (Idem.)

31. A recent endow­ment by Hans-Adam II to Prince­ton Uni­ver­sity estab­lished an aca­d­e­mic insti­tute that will con­cen­trate on areas that have been major focal points of Islamist activity—Chechnya, Kosovo and the Balkans, and Kash­mir. Is this insti­tu­tion a think tank that will work as part of a NGO covert oper­a­tions milieu? Does this insti­tu­tion, in effect, con­sti­tute another link of the Liecht­en­stein royal fam­ily to Islamists (like the Asat Trust dis­cussed above)? In this con­text, one should not lose sight of the sim­i­lar­ity of the focus of the Liecht­en­stein Insti­tute and the UNPO. Are both of these orga­ni­za­tions part of the new “kinder, gen­tler” covert oper­a­tions par­a­digm? Bear in mind that both the Haps­burgs and the closely-associated House of Liecht­en­stein are con­ser­v­a­tive Catholics. Their inter­est in “native peo­ples” and “self-determination” for Islamists, Turks, Tibetan Bud­dhists and Lakota Sioux is all the more sus­pi­cious, under the cir­cum­stances!! “A $12 mil­lion gift to Prince­ton from Prince Hans-Adam II of Liecht­en­stein will cre­ate the Liecht­en­stein Insti­tute on Self-Determination, which will serve as a cen­ter for research and teach­ing on issues of self-determination around the world. The gift will expand the University’s exist­ing Liecht­en­stein Research Pro­gram on Self-Determination, which also has been funded by Prince Hans-Adam II. It will enable Prince­ton fac­ulty, stu­dents and out­side experts to expand their work and embark on wide-ranging new projects in such places as Kosovo, Kash­mir, and Chech­nya. [Empha­sis added.]”

(“$12 Mil­lion Gift Estab­lishes Insti­tute”; Prince­ton Weekly Bul­letin, Sep­tem­ber 25, 2000, Vol. 90, No. 3.)

32. “As a bridge between acad­e­mia and the prac­ti­cal world, the Liecht­en­stein Insti­tute will engage both in fun­da­men­tal research and in a prac­ti­cal search for solu­tions to real-world prob­lems. ‘By cre­at­ing a non-polemical envi­ron­ment for research and dis­cus­sion, we hope to help reduce the tumul­tuous and fre­quently vio­lent process inher­ent in the search for increased auton­omy,’ said Wolf­gang Danspeck­gru­ber [a nice Anglo-Saxon name—D.E.], a lec­turer in the Woodrow Wil­son School of Pub­lic and Inter­na­tional Affairs and the found­ing direc­tor of the new insti­tute. He believes the insti­tute can advance com­pro­mises that rec­og­nize com­mu­nity auton­omy within exist­ing states along with regional inte­gra­tion, pre­vent­ing seces­sion in all but the most extreme cases.” (Idem.)

33. “Researchers at the insti­tute are begin­ning work on three major projects. An ini­tia­tive launched in June by Danspeck­gru­ber and Stephen Kotkin, direc­tor of the Russ­ian Stud­ies Pro­gram, is explor­ing state power, bor­ders and self-governance in the for­mer Soviet Union. The project is expected to con­clude with find­ings and rec­om­men­da­tions pre­sented at a major con­fer­ence in 2001. In the sec­ond project, which is also sup­ported by a grant from the Carnegie Cor­po­ra­tion of New York, researchers will develop strate­gies to pre­vent and man­age crises of self-determination. This project brings together Danspeck­gru­ber, Michael Doyle, direc­tor of the Cen­ter of Inter­na­tional Stud­ies, Jef­frey Herbst, chair of the Depart­ment of Pol­i­tics; and Gilbert Roz­man, pro­fes­sor of soci­ol­ogy.” (Idem.)

34. Notice that Kash­mir is one of the areas on which the Hans-Adam-financed Liecht­en­stein insti­tute will focus. In para­graphs 11–14 above, the B. Raman paper notes that the Dalai Lama/Xinjiang separatist/Islamist milieu over­laps the inter­ests at war against India in that area. “In the third project, researchers will search for solu­tions to the prob­lem in Kash­mir, where sep­a­ratist groups have mounted an 11-year strug­gle against Indian rule. Pre­dom­i­nantly Mus­lim Kash­mir has been the main point of con­flict between India and Pak­istan since the par­ti­tion of India in 1947. At the same time, the insti­tute will con­tinue to work to assist in find­ing a peace­ful solu­tion for con­flict in the Balkans. An inter­na­tional con­fer­ence eval­u­at­ing the impli­ca­tions of self-determination at the begin­ning of the 21st cen­tury is planned for the com­ing aca­d­e­mic year, Danspeck­gru­ber said. . . . The insti­tute is an out­growth of the Liecht­en­stein Research Pro­gram on Self-Determination, which was cre­ated in 1994 and sup­ported by Prince Hans-Adam II. . . .” (Idem.)

35. End­ing on a decid­edly spec­u­la­tive note, the pro­gram high­lights the fact that the Lakota [Sioux] Native Amer­i­can peo­ple are one of the groups in which the UNPO is greatly inter­ested. The Lakota occupy a very impor­tant strate­gic posi­tion within the geo­graph­i­cal United States. Note the map of the Lakota ter­ri­tory as por­trayed by the UNPO. It is Mr. Emory’s opin­ion that the use of unrep­re­sented, “native” peo­ples by ultra-reactionary inter­ests like the Haps­burgs and the asso­ci­ated House of Liecht­en­stein is a cyn­i­cal manip­u­la­tion of these pop­u­la­tions. Rather than sin­cerely cham­pi­oning the inter­ests of these groups and pro­mot­ing their wel­fare, sus­te­nance and demo­c­ra­tic gov­er­nance, they appear to be using these groups as vehi­cles for the desta­bi­liza­tion and par­ti­tion­ing of larger nations—Russia and China in par­tic­u­lar. Are the Lakota being sim­i­larly tar­geted? Do the Haps­burgs and their Under­ground Reich allies intend to pre­cip­i­tate a geo­graph­i­cal Balka­niza­tion of the United States? Do the appar­ent Under­ground Reich ele­ments intend to pre­cip­i­tate a bloody repres­sion of the Lakota in order to [fur­ther] dis­credit the United States? Or are the Native Americans—including the Lakota—intended to be used as what Lucy Komisar calls “off­shore elements?”

Discussion

4 comments for “FTR #550 Going Native”

  1. [...] Comme l’a fait remar­qué Dave Emory dans une série d’émissions inti­t­ulées Going Native, la cause autochtone, aborigène ou amérin­di­enne sert sou­vent de cou­ver­ture à des activistes [...]

    Posted by La campagne de BDS sur la rue St-Denis à Montréal: Une inquisition anti-Québécois et une opération nazie/fasciste | Lys-d'Or | August 29, 2012, 8:58 am
  2. Otto Von Hab­s­burg’ Wikipedia page among other sites, describe Otto as being very out­spo­ken against Hitler. Also it appeared to me he was por­trayed as a vic­tim who had his prop­erty con­fis­cated and never returned by the Nazi’s. He was sen­tenced to death by the Nazis and had his cit­i­zen­ship revoked. It also states he hep­led thou­sands of peo­ple flee from Aus­tria to avoid the Nazis. Are the points I men­tioned above not true?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_von_Habsburg#Titles_and_styles

    Posted by Eddie | April 12, 2013, 8:55 pm
  3. @Eddie–

    Wikipedia is NOT, gen­er­ally speak­ing, a cred­i­ble medium. I use it occa­sion­ally, but the links must be care­fully checked out.

    The CIA, among other insti­tu­tions, has spent mil­lions of dol­lars doc­tor­ing Wikipedia.

    Otto von Haps­burg is one of the most right-wing mem­bers of the Euro­pean Par­lia­ment, and was very active in sup­port­ing the German-sponsored breakup of Yugoslavia.

    He was also a mem­ber of the “Free Rudolph Hess Society.”

    ‘Nuff said.

    I rec­om­mend read­ing “The Nazis Go Under­ground,” avail­able for down­load for free on this site.

    The Nazis care­fully estab­lished anti-Nazi cre­den­tials for those whom they had tabbed for post­war work.

    Otto is dis­cussed in FTR #154. Give it a listen.

    Otto is also dis­cussed in Michael Schmidt’s “The New Reich: Vio­lent Extrem­ism in Uni­fied Ger­many.” (Check out FTR #293.)

    Wikipedia is full of it when dis­cussing Otto.

    Best,

    Dave

    Posted by Dave Emory | April 13, 2013, 1:04 pm
  4. [...] Native Amer­i­can ter­ri­to­ries in the U.S. One won­ders if they will be advanc­ing the Under­ground Reich/UNPO agenda of fragmenting [...]

    Posted by Have Turkish Citizens Had Enough of Erdogan’s Taffy? (Viva Attaturk!) | The Freedom Report | June 7, 2013, 3:43 pm

Post a comment