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

For The Record  

FTR #819 Proxy War and the Earth Island Boogie (What the Hell Does Dave Emory Mean by “Underground Reich?,” Part 3)

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash drive that can be obtained here. The new drive is a 32-gigabyte drive that is current as of the programs and articles posted by 10/02/2014. The new drive (available for a tax-deductible contribution of $65.00 or more) contains FTR #812.  (The previous flash drive was current through the end of May of 2012 and contained FTR #748.)

You can subscribe to e-mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE

You can subscribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can subscribe to the comments made on programs and posts–an excellent source of information in, and of, itself HERE.

Listen: MP3

This program was recorded in one, 60-minute segment.    

ISIS followers vowing allegiance to the group. Hint: They are NOT auditioning for an anti-perspirant commercial.

Introduction: Much of the program is a reading of a post synopsizing part of Peter Levenda’s recent book The Hitler Legacy: The Nazi Cult in Diaspora: How it was Organized, How it was Funded, and Why It Remains a Threat to Global Security in the Age of Terrorism. (We have not read the book yet. We neither endorse nor criticize the main body of text for that reason.)

AFA #22 is important for understanding this broadcast. Using the material indicated by the many “tags” at the top of this post will flesh out listeners’ understanding to the point of exhaustion. Also: check out the video from which the photo at left was taken.

The article highlights important points made in numerous past posts and programs. Discussing the geopolitical concept of the Earth Island (or “World Island” as it is sometimes known), the program underscores the significance of the Earth Island and the strategem of using proxy warriors and asymmetrical warfare to accomplish the feat.

In particlular, Levenda analyes the Third Reich and Underground Reich’s use of Muslim proxy warriors in both World Wars and thereafter. Continuing their operational existence under the auspices of the Gehlen org in its various incarnations and, through and, in accordance with, that, dominant elements within the CIA.

In FTR #’s 710720723 we noted that the GOP/Underground Reich faction of the U.S. intelligence establishment was pursuing covert operations in the Earth Island, particularly in parts of Russia and China. Partnered in this is the Muslim Brotherhood and irredentist Turkish elements seeking a return to the glory days of the Ottoman Empire.

Following the turn to the Muslim Brotherhood (formalized during Bush’s second administration growing out of the profound GOP links to the Brotherhood and the al-Taqwa milieu) we witnessed the center piece of this operation–the so-called Arab Spring. The Boston Marathon bombing appears to be “blowback” from this operation, with FBI apparently having cut across elements of the covert operation mentioned above.

The Fetullah Gulen organization appears to be an outcropping of this massive Earth Island “op.”

Before returning to the subject of the “Muslim Brotherhood Spring,” let’s highlight a key paragraph of the Kaplan essay, summing up an all-too familiar pattern in the operations that are bringing to power the German Hand in the Ottoman/Islamist glove:

. . . . Each U. S. military action in Europe and the Middle East since 1990, however, with the exception of Iraq, has followed an overt pattern: First there is an armed conflict within the country where the intervention will take place. American news media heavily report this conflict. The “good guys” in the story are the rebels. The “bad guys,” to be attacked by American military force, are brutally anti-democratic, and committers of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Prestigious public figures, NGOs, judicial and quasi-judicial bodies and international organizations call for supporting the rebels and attacking the regime. Next, the American president orders American logistical support and arms supplies for the rebels. Finally the American president orders military attack under the auspices of NATO in support of the rebels. The attack usually consists of aerial bombing, today’s equivalent of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries’ gunboat which could attack coastal cities of militarily weak countries without fear of retaliation. The ultimate outcome of each American intervention is the replacement of a secular government with an Islamist regime in an area that had been part of the Ottoman Empire. . . .

Otto Skorzeny

Another fascinating and very important part of the article concerns the ICC, much-ballyhooed by the so-called progressive sector in this and other countries:

. . . . From that article, “A Lawless Global Court” by John Rosenthal (Policy Review Feb. 1. 2004 No.123), one learns that the ICC is a project initiated, promoted and, to a considerable extent, funded by Germany. Given this, the idea that the ICC serves Germany’s purposes is common sense. Through the ICC connection, Germany’s promotion of the “Arab Spring” is clear. Yet it is never or almost never mentioned. This silence calls for explanation. . . .

Amen! That silence does indeed call for an explanation.

Notice, also, the German methodology here. Underscoring German power-political methodology prior to, and during, World War I, Kaplan’s analysis applies equally well to Nazi German’s geo-political orientation. It applies equally well to that of the Federal Republic, which, like the GOP and a disturbingly large part of the U.S. national security establishment, is controlled by Germany:

. . . . In the view of the leaders of Germany, Turkey was controllable through a combination of economic intercourse, gifts of educational opportunities, provision of technical expertise and administrative aid, as well as bribes to Turkish officials. Germany saw influence over Turkey as a means of influencing Moslems worldwide for its own interests. . . .

Collating the two articles in this program (and description) is important and revealing of dynamics crucial to an understanding 0f the and future political landscapes and to the lines of argument and research on this program (and website). Listeners are emphatically encouraged to watch the video of accolytes pledging allegiance to ISIS, from which the photo at upper left is taken.

Program Highlights Include: The Skorzeny mission to Egypt to Nazify the Egyptian general staff and intelligence service; highlighting key aspects of the Balkans wars of the 1990’s; the role of the Grand Mufti in the development of the Nazi-Islamist connection; Skorzeny’s relationship with Yasser Arafat; Erdogan’s strong relationship with the Bank Al-Taqwa milieu and the Muslim Brotherhood; the fascist Third Position; the Strategy of Tension.

1. Much of the program is a reading of a post synopsizing the last chapter of Peter Levenda’s recent book The Hitler Legacy: The Nazi Cult in Diaspora: How it was Organized, How it was Funded, and Why It Remains a Threat to Global Security in the Age of Terrorism. (We have not read the book yet. We neither endorse nor criticize the main body of text for that reason.)

The article highlights important points made in numerous past posts and programs. Discussing the geopolitical concept of the Earth Island (or “World Island” as it is sometimes known), the program underscores the significance of the Earth Island and the strategem of using proxy warriors and asymmetrical warfare to accomplish the feat.

In particlular, Levenda analyes the Third Reich and Underground Reich’s use of Muslim proxy warriors in both World Wars and thereafter. Continuing their operational existence under the auspices of the Gehlen org in its various incarnations and, through and, in accordance with, that, dominant elements within the CIA.

There is no substantive discussion of the Muslim Brotherhood in Levenda’s presentation, however information about that vitally important element of analysis is readily and abundantly available on this website.

“Hitler’s Legacy: The Skorzeny Syndrome” by Peter Levenda; disinfo.com; 11/07/2114.

“Terrorism, the Skorzeny Syndrome, is flourishing in the modern world, a reminder that Hitler and Nazism are still taking their toll more than three decades after the Third Reich collapsed.”—Glenn B. Infield115

The above quotation is from Infield’s biography of Otto Skorzeny, published in 1981, and the facts are as true today as they were then. Infield writes of the relationship that existed between Skorzeny and Yassir Arafat, for instance, and reminds us how Skorzeny advised the PLO and Al-Fatah from his base in Cairo. Infield knew and interviewed Skorzeny, and his biography of “Hitler’s Commando” is relevant to any contemporary study of the origins of modern terrorism.

What the world has been experiencing since at least 2001 and certainly for years earlier than the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon has been what analysts refer to as “asymmetrical warfare” conducted by “non-state actors.” This is a technique that was developed to perfection by Skorzeny and the other leaders of what we have called ODESSA. The fact that the Western intelligence agencies turned a blind eye to Skorzeny’s activities has contributed to our inability to confront and defeat what we have called Islamist terrorism.

Arms dealing, covert international banking systems, targeted assassinations, terror bombings, the “strategy of tension” as it was described and defined by fascist terrorist Stefano della Chiaie, already existed as part of an underground terror network long before al-Qaeda was born.

After World War II, the American people thought that Nazi Germany had been defeated and the “war” was over; this book demonstrates that it never was. Instead, we were told that Communism was the new threat and we had to pull out all the stops to prevent a Communist takeover of the country. And so our military and our intelligence agencies collaborated with surviving Nazis to go after Communists. We refused to pursue worldwide right wing terror groups and assassins. After all, they were killing Communists and leftists; they were doing us a service. Like Hoover and the Mafia, the CIA refused to believe a Nazi Underground existed even as they collaborated with it (via the Gehlen Organization and the like).

The whole thrust of this book has been that American leaders in business, finance, media, and politics collaborated with Nazis before, during, and after the war. The West’s share in the “blame” for Al-Qaeda, et al, goes back a long way—before Eisenhower—to a cabal of extremist US Army generals and emigre Eastern Europeans who didn’t have much of a problem with Nazism since they feared Communism more. The Church, the Tibetans, the Japanese, the Germans, the Croatians—and the Americans—all felt that Communism was the greater danger, long before WW II. We enlisted war criminals to fight on our side. We appropriated the idea of global jihad from the Nazis and their WW I predecessors. We amped up their plan to weaponize religion and convinced Muslims, who hated each other, to band together to fight Communism. And when Afghanistan was liberated and the Soviet Union was defeated?

September 11, 2001.

Our cynical exploitation of religion has delivered a hideous stream of blowback that threatens the world still.

With the Nazi diaspora, the leaders of the Third Reich who had survived—who were either living underground, or were “denazified” and living freely above ground—constituted a government-in-exile. They remained in contact, reinforced each other’s beliefs, provided logistical support where possible, and kept the faith alive. They became involved in political and military intrigues around the globe, always with the goal of causing an imbalance in global power structures. Motivated by anti-Semitism, they collaborated with Arab leaders and guerrilla organizations in attacks against Israel, even going so far as to develop weapons systems in Egypt. They wrote propaganda against Israel and against Jews in general, repeating the same libels as before. They formed “neo-Nazi” groups in Europe, Latin America, North America, and elsewhere, cultivating a fawning new generation of followers on every continent. They support Holocaust deniers and right-wing extremists everywhere, even when they do not agree on all points. They found official positions within extremist governments in the Middle East and Latin America.

They also constitute an army-in-exile. They trained troops, instructed security forces in interrogation and torture, ran guns. They conspired to assassinate objectionable leaders in various countries, as well as those who betrayed their own network. They developed weapons of mass destruction long before the identical claim was laid at the door of Saddam Hussein.

They are “non-state actors” like Al-Qaeda, with the difference that they recently had a state. They conduct “asymmetric warfare” because they can no longer field battalions made of tanks and planes and submarines—and no longer really need to do so. Using terror as a weapon has proven to be far more effective. They move money silently and unseen through the world’s financial institutions. People like Schacht and Genoud wrote the book.

And they are loosely organized. Individual units possess a certain degree of deniability, something that newer terror groups have copied.

Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hizbollah, Fatah, Jemaah Islamiyyah, Lashkar- e-Taiba, etc. are all children of ODESSA. The pact between Nazi anti-Semitism and Arab anti-Semitism was made with Hajj Amin al-Husseini all those years ago—and has been renewed every decade since with refinements as necessary to reflect emerging political realities in the aftermath of the fall of the Soviet Union. Skorzeny, al-Husseini, Genoud: one big happy family.

Emboldened by the defeat of the Red Army in Afghanistan, aided and abetted by CIA, the militant forces of that remote yet deadly landscape turned their attention on the West. Repudiating Western decadence and liberalism, the Taliban enforced strict and even idiosyncratic interpretations of syariah law. Proponents of the Third Way, the Taliban were equally disgusted with Soviet atheism and Communism, and with American materialism and liberalism. Yet, they won the war against the Soviet invasion using asymmetric warfare. They were not able to field armored divisions, but had to wage a long and exhausting guerrilla war against helicopter gunships, tanks, and rockets.

Asymmetric warfare is usually defined as the conflict between two, dramatically unequal, forces. The war of the United States in Vietnam is given as one example, where the vastly superior (in terms of economy, numbers, and military strength) US forces fought the guerrilla forces represented by the Viet Cong, and the regular North Vietnamese forces represented by the Viet Minh. Often the Israeli- Palestinian conflict is given as another example, with the army and air force of the Israeli military opposed to the various guerrilla factions represented by the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), plus those of Hamas and Hizbollah.

In most, if not all cases, of asymmetric warfare of the last hundred years or so, it has often been that of a powerful western country embroiled in a conflict with numerically and economically weaker non-state actors, which the current problem with Al-Qaeda and ISIL seems to represent. In these cases, the non-state actors are fighting for their own territory, language, ethnic identity, etc., often against a colonial or former colonial power, such as England, France, the Netherlands, Spain, etc.

There is one type of asymmetric warfare that is usually not recognized or included in studies of this phenomenon, however: it is when a powerful state loses its power yet continues to fight the forces that defeated it, using the same means as non-state actors— such as terrorism and assassination. There is to my knowledge only one such example in the modern world, and that is Nazi Germany.

As pointed out in studies of terrorism and asymmetric warfare, nationalist and ethno-nationalist groups are those most likely to engage in this type of protracted and violent conflict. That is not to say that leftist, “internationalist” groups do not, and have not, also been involved in asymmetric warfare; of course they have. The number of violent incidents involving leftist groups is actually larger than those perpetrated by nationalist groups; however the number of fatalities is substantially greater in those incidents perpetrated by the nationalists and ethno-nationalist, anti-colonial groups.

Nationalism is a hallmark of the type of terrorism we have come to experience in the post-World War Two period. It was actually given a form and an agenda by the Nazis who created the Werewolf concept: a stay-behind guerrilla force that would use asymmetric tactics to wage war against the Allies. This was an example of a state that refused to cease hostilities even after defeat.
Another type of asymmetric actor is the religious ideologue. As has been pointed out in studies of terrorism—especially since the events of September 11, 2001—this new type of adversary may not be identified with a single ethnicity or geographic territory. Even though the origins of the violent religious terrorist may be found in the post-colonial period, the nature of the conflict has changed considerably since then.

What many fail to realize is that the ideology of the Nazi Party— particularly as refined by the SS—was essentially a spiritual ideology. I have made the point elsewhere that the Nazi Party was a cult. To try to understand it as a purely political entity (in a modern, American context) is to make a grave mistake.

The Nazi network that was formed in the last days of the war and which has existed, in one form or another in the seventy years since then, is comprised of both a nationalist and a religious agenda. The Nazi Party has its origins in esoteric Aryanism, such as represented by the writings of Guido von List and Lanz von Liebenfels, as well as occultist groups such as the Armanenschaft, the Germanenorden, and the Thule Gesellschaft. These groups combined racist ideology with spiritual, mystical ideas and practices, some of which were adapted from more mainstream esoteric groups such as the Theosophical Society and the writings of its founder, Helena Blavatsky. The Social Darwinism that is one of the hallmarks of the Nazi regime is the “outer court” of the spiritual Darwinism that is clearly elucidated in Blavatsky’s works. What this means is that Nazism is just as much a spiritual philosophy as it is a political one.

Thus the basic components of the non-state actor in asymmetric warfare are present in the Nazi Underground (what we have been calling ODESSA). The terrorist acts perpetrated by this Underground are precisely those of the modern non-state actors with which we have all become familiar. The motivation for ODESSA runs parallel to that of “Islamist” terror organizations: a spiritual viewpoint that both organizations wish to impose on the world through the medium of terrorism, assassinations, and the like. Both ideologies are exclusive rather than inclusive; both are anti-Semitic; both are anti-American and deplore what they see as Western “decadence.” (One could make a very good case that Hitler’s objection to modern art, modern music and modern culture in general is virtually identical to the point of view of Islamist critics concerning the same.)

In addition—and this may be more important than it seems at first glance—many members of the SS and the Wehrmacht converted to Islam after the war, and found employment and residence in Muslim countries. In some cases, they actively supported Arab regimes in their opposition to the State of Israel by providing technical expertise, engineers, and training in interrogation, espionage, and related arts of war.

I believe this provides an important perspective into the current terrorist phenomenon, as it shows a continuity of purpose combined with tactical and operational methods that have their origin in the murky world of the first days of the Cold War—when a cynical manipulation of religion using non-state actors took place under the aegis of a decades-long and often poorly thought-out campaign of state-sponsored anti-Communism.

During the course of many years of research (from about 1968– present) into the origins of religious violence I have come into personal contact with both the PLO and Jemaah Islamiyyah (JI), as well as with North American racialist and white supremacist groups such as the National Renaissance Party (NRP) and the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) among others, as well as with the South American Nazi sanctuary and nexus for Operation Condor, Colonia Dignidad in Chile. I lived in Malaysia for seven years, in an apartment that was only a few blocks from where the 9/11 attacks were originally discussed, and in Indonesia where I met Abu Bakr Ba’asyir, the architect of the Bali Bombings in 2002, and founder of JI.

I have also been on intimate terms with a number of conventional and non-conventional religious organizations spanning various forms of Judaism, Christianity and Islam as well as Buddhism, the religious of India, Afro-Caribbean religions, and modern so called “New Age” movements such as Wicca, Satanism, and the secret societies of Western Europe and America. I believe it is this unique perspective on both religion and politics that informs my thesis that the choices we made as a country in the immediate post-war period have resulted in the current state of affairs where terrorism, “Islamism,” and other forms of asymmetric conflict are concerned.

To quote Infield again:

It has become evident during recent years that major wars in the nuclear age will be fewer than those in the past but individual and group terrorism will increase steadily. Skorzeny and his commandos during the Third Reich and Skorzeny and his ODESSA members during the postwar years were leaders in modern day terroristic tactics. Skorzeny’s followers and students adhere to his teachings today.116

It was Skorzeny and his colleagues in ODESSA who, as early as 1950 and the outbreak of the Korean War, proposed forming a bloc of non-aligned nations in Asia, Africa, and Latin America to stand up to America and Russia: exactly the same position taken by Sukarno five years later. The position of the Islamist theoreticians of today is not dissimilar: the difference is that the Soviet Union has already fallen.

While China may develop into a threat, Uzbek and other activists in western China are creating another Muslim front with the intention of destabilizing that regime. Seen as both Communist and Capitalist, China could be an interesting adversary for the Third Way position of contemporary Nazism. China is at least as nationalist as its former enemy, Japan.

As for Japan itself, it has recovered remarkably since the devastation of the Second World War and two atomic bombs. Japan and Germany are economic powerhouses. Even though Japan has been struggling in recent years, it is still one of the most prosperous nations in the world.

As for Germany, it has developed exactly as planned so long ago. It is reunited and the leader of the European Union, easily its most powerful and influential member. It is true that growing numbers of immigrants from Eastern Europe and especially Muslim immigrants from Turkey, the Balkans, and North Africa, are providing an environment where questions concerning German identity and responsibility are being raised. But as German cities have been rebuilt, industrial growth is strong, and memories of the war are fading with each new generation, it is doubtful whether any serious soul-searching will occur. With tensions rising in Europe over the fate of Ukraine and the Russian annexation of Crimea, it may be that the world will look to Germany again to provide the buffer between a newly-aroused Russia and the much more vulnerable nations of Eastern and Southern Europe.

It is doubtful whether the world will once again be confronted with jack-booted storm troopers wearing swastika armbands, singing the Horst Wessel song; but that does not mean that Nazism has disappeared. It has merely changed uniforms and moved to a different theater of operations. I do not wish to deprive the Islamic groups of agency in their present conflict with the West, but it is important to emphasize that they were as manipulated and exploited by the Germans in two World Wars as they had been by the colonial powers.

The concept of global jihad was foreign to Islam until created by a German spy—of Jewish ancestry, no less—with a view towards using Muslims as proxy soldiers in Germany’s fight with the Allied forces of England, France, and Russia. And when the Cold War began, they were manipulated once again: this time by American intelligence efforts to weaponize Islam against the Soviet Union.

To continue the struggle against the Western world that was begun by Westerners themselves for motives that had nothing to do with Islam or with genuine jihad is to cooperate in Western strategies that only will result in the destruction of more Muslim lives and the desolation of more Arab lands.

This is especially true with regards to Palestine. The Palestinians themselves must realize that no assistance is coming their way from the vastly wealthier and populous Arab world. The devastation of Gaza and the ongoing occupation of the West Bank is the legacy of decades of Arab indecision and manipulation. It is obviously far more beneficial to have the Palestinians live in squalor and die in refugee camps than to have the Arab nations work together to create a more productive solution. The Arab leaders have long since realized that the Nazi and Zen ideals of heroic death on the battlefield are dated notions, suicidal and non-productive, that can only end in annihilation. Yet they tolerate and even encourage the raging anti-Semitism of Hitler, Goebbels, and von Leers because it directs Palestinian anger towards Israel (and the United States), and away from the Arab leaders themselves who have found themselves in an increasingly vulnerable situation since the revolts of the Arab Spring.

Palestinian suicide bombers, however, have looked towards Hitler and Hajj Amin al-Husseini as avatars of the New Islam, of the desire to create a caliphate that will stretch from Jerusalem and Mecca all the way to Southeast Asia. To Kuala Lumpur, and Jakarta.

And, yes, even to Sumbawa.

We are still fighting World War One, and we will continue to fight it. We are redrawing the world map once again in lines of blood and steel. America should be at the forefront of the fight to end these conflicts, but our moral leadership has been called into question again and again. We made mistakes at the end of World War Two: we sided with the colonial powers when we should have made common cause with the indigenous peoples of the Middle East, Africa, and Asia who looked to us as their natural allies. We enlisted the aid of Nazis and Nazi war criminals to accelerate our space program and to field espionage agents against the Soviet Union. We allowed dedicated and committed anti-Semites with a history of violence and bloodshed against civilian populations to run freely in the developing nations, training torturers and assassins.

We acted out of fear; we co-opted our values, trading them for greater security.

This, too, is the Hitler Legacy. We thought we could control the Devil that was the Nazi Party and the SS, using them to protect ourselves against Russia. We used the strategies developed by the Germans in two world wars to coerce and cajole Muslim believers to declare a holy war—a holy war that would one day be aimed at us.

We lived up to the charges made against us by the Islamists— that we were without faith, bereft of spirituality, obsessed with materialism, cold enough to the summons of the soul that we could contemplate weaponizing religion: seeing it as just one more tool, one more element in our ever growing arsenal of destruction. We could urge Muslims and Buddhists to risk their lives in attacks against our enemies, willing to fight to the last drop of their blood, using their faith—and clumsy, awkward protestations of our own— as the motivation for deadly, violent action when we had no moral, no legitimate right at all, to demand this of them.

Is it any wonder, then, that the blowback was so severe, the hatred so concentrated?

The networks still exist, transforming softly from time to time, changing with every new political development on the world stage. There are names in the address book of ODESSA chief Hans- Ulrich Rudel of people who are still alive as this is being written: people scattered all over the world, devotees, true believers, carrying the torch in a virtual Nuremberg Rally, feeling more and more comfortable by the day.

New groups are being formed, new leaders chosen from among the faithful. Xenophobia is at an all-time high in Europe and increasingly in America. The Internet has provided new and improved means of communication. Arab systems of money transfer such as hawala are used to defeat the strictures of the international banking system, made more severe after the events of 2001. The hysteria we used to feel about secret Communists has been replaced by hysteria over terrorism. We lost our way, briefly, in the 1950s over Communism; and innocent people were ruined, reputations destroyed. Now again we are equally paranoid to the extent that TSA agents pat down the elderly and infants in strollers. We are increasingly made to disrobe before we can board a plane, and we are thankful because this means we will be safer.

But, if we want to, we can walk across the border into Canada or Mexico.

As the political life of every country becomes more and more polarized between “right” and “left,” the men of ODESSA can only laugh at our discomfort. When the Berlin Wall came down many thought that the world had become a safer place. They did not realize that this was only phase one of the overall plan, the one that might have been hatched in Strasbourg in 1944 at the Maison Rouge Hotel. Or not. But it was the plan.

And when the Soviet Union fell, many patted themselves on the back thinking that history was at an end, that all serious conflict was over, except maybe for a little clean-up here and there. Nothing to worry about. Our side won.

Dream on. . . .

2. Next, we present a very important post that distills a line of inquiry we’ve been pursuing for years. Cornell University professor Robert Kaplan notes that U.S. military intervention in the Muslim world occurs in former territories of the Ottoman Empire and results in Islamists coming to power for the ultimate benefit of–Germany!

In FTR #’s 710720723 we noted that the GOP/Underground Reich faction of the U.S. intelligence establishment was pursuing covert operations in the Earth Island, particularly in parts of Russia and China. Partnered in this is the Muslim Brotherhood and irredentist Turkish elements seeking a return to the glory days of the Ottoman Empire.

Following the turn to the Muslim Brotherhood (formalized during Bush’s second administration growing out of the profound GOP links to the Brotherhood and the al-Taqwa milieu) we witnessed the center piece of this operation–the so-called Arab Spring. The Boston Marathon bombing appears to be “blowback” from this operation, with FBI apparently having cut across elements of the covert operation mentioned above.

The Fetullah Gulen organization appears to be an outcropping of this massive Earth Island “op.”

Before returning to the subject of the “Muslim Brotherhood Spring,” let’s highlight a key paragraph of the Kaplan essay, summing up an all-too familiar pattern in the operations that are bringing to power the German Hand in the Ottoman/Islamist glove:

. . . . Each U. S. military action in Europe and the Middle East since 1990, however, with the exception of Iraq, has followed an overt pattern: First there is an armed conflict within the country where the intervention will take place. American news media heavily report this conflict. The “good guys” in the story are the rebels. The “bad guys,” to be attacked by American military force, are brutally anti-democratic, and committers of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Prestigious public figures, NGOs, judicial and quasi-judicial bodies and international organizations call for supporting the rebels and attacking the regime. Next, the American president orders American logistical support and arms supplies for the rebels. Finally the American president orders military attack under the auspices of NATO in support of the rebels. The attack usually consists of aerial bombing, today’s equivalent of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries’ gunboat which could attack coastal cities of militarily weak countries without fear of retaliation. The ultimate outcome of each American intervention is the replacement of a secular government with an Islamist regime in an area that had been part of the Ottoman Empire. . . .

Another fascinating and very important part of the article concerns the ICC, much-ballyhooed by the so-called progressive sector in this and other countries:

. . . . From that article, “A Lawless Global Court” by John Rosenthal (Policy Review Feb. 1. 2004 No.123), one learns that the ICC is a project initiated, promoted and, to a considerable extent, funded by Germany. Given this, the idea that the ICC serves Germany’s purposes is common sense. Through the ICC connection, Germany’s promotion of the “Arab Spring” is clear. Yet it is never or almost never mentioned. This silence calls for explanation. . . .

Amen! That silence does indeed call for an explanation.

Notice, also, the German methodology here. Underscoring German power-political methodology prior to, and during, World War I, Kaplan’s analysis applies equally well to Nazi German’s geo-political orientation. It applies equally well to that of the Federal Republic, which, like the GOP and a disturbingly large part of the U.S. national security establishment, is controlled by Germany:

. . . . In the view of the leaders of Germany, Turkey was controllable through a combination of economic intercourse, gifts of educational opportunities, provision of technical expertise and administrative aid, as well as bribes to Turkish officials. Germany saw influence over Turkey as a means of influencing Moslems worldwide for its own interests. . . .

Let’s review the bullet points from the description of FTR #737 (recorded on 4/2/2011.):

  • WikiLeaks appears to have played a role in the events, with a purported “leaked” State Department memo having helped spur the uprising in Tunisia which, in turn, helped to galvanize events in Egypt. Far from being the “progressive,” “whistle-blowing” entity it purports to be, WikiLeaks is a far-right, Nazi-influenced propaganda and data mining operation.
  • Karl Rove’s dominant presence in Sweden as the WikiLeaks “op” was gaining momentum may well have much to do with the “leaking” of State Department cables from the Obama administration that are undoubtedly making the successful execution of statecraft even more difficult under the circumstances.
  • Far from being a spontaneous event, the Middle East uprisings appear to have stemmed, in part at least, from a covert operation begun under the Bush administration and continued under Obama’s tenure. (Obama may well have been set up to take the fall for negative consequences of the event. It is unclear just how “on top of it” his administration is. In this regard, the event is very much like the Bay of Pigs operation, begun under Eisenhower’s administration and continued under JFK.)
  • The operation may well be intended to destabilize the Obama administration, paving the way for the ascent of the GOP in the United States. In this respect, it is very much like what has come to be known as the October Surprise.
  • Courtesy of WikiLeaks, the operation’s existence was “blown”–contacts between U.S. Embassy personnel in Cairo and leaders of the April 6 movement during the last months of the Bush administration came to light courtesy of more allegedly “leaked” State Department memos made public by WikLeaks. Previously, the U.S. embassy in Cairo had been in contact with leaders of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.
  • Looming large in the unfolding scenario are the theories of non-violent theoretician Gene Sharp, who held positions associated with the “liberal” element of the U.S. intelligence apparatus.
  • Sharp’s activities have been underwritten by junk bond king Michael Milken’s former right-hand man Peter Ackerman, who has served as an advisor to the United States Institute of Peace, an agency of the U.S. government.
  • The United States Institute of Peace’s Muslim World Initiative–charged by critics with legitimizing jihadists–may well have been the initiating element in these developments.
  • High tech firms with links to the U.S. intelligence establishment appear to have facilitated the Piggy-Back Coup.
  • The Muslim Brotherhood’s free-market economic perspective has endeared it to laissez-faire theoreticians around the world. American University in Cairo, at which Brotherhood affiliated theoreticians hold forth, is an epicenter of the economic philosophy of Ibn Khaldun, the Ikhwan’s economic godfather.
  • Despite assurances from many “expert” sources, the Muslim Brotherhood seems poised to benefit the most from the unfolding events in the Middle East.
  • The Muslim Brotherhood-controlled Al Jazeera network has also had much to do with the uprisings.
  • The youthful idealists of the Anonymous/Pirate Bay/Pirate Party milieu appear to have been cynically deceived and manipulated into supporting an operation that figures to empower some truly dark forces. Those dark forces are fundamentally opposed to the Utopian values dear to the Anonymous/Pirate Bay folks.
  • Those same reassuring voices have told us that the Brotherhood aspires to a political agenda to the “moderate” agenda of the Turkish AK party. That party is closely affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. The “moderation” of the AK Party may be weighed in the discussion below.
  • Precipitating the ascent of the fascist Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East may well be an attempt at using the Muslim population of the Earth Island as a proxy force against Russia and China. The goal, ultimately, is to peel away strategic, resource-rich areas such, as the petroleum-rich areas of the Caucasus and Xinjiang province.

The Robert E. Kaplan post epitomizes the arguments we’ve been advancing for many years. Please digest it and disseminate the information to others. Although he does not mention it, veteran listeners and readers will no doubt recognize the presence of the Underground Reich in the concatenation that Kaplan presents. Detailing the evolution of the Underground Reich is beyond the scope of this post.

The wealth of information contained on this website will provide the necessary intellectual underpinning for interested and curious readers/listeners.

Suffice it to say here, that the proxy warriors of the neo-Ottoman caliphate will, ultimately, be used to destroy the U.S. and the U.K., as well as Israel.

With Obama responding to his long-forecast (in these quarters) destabilization by continuing to build bi-partisan bridges and committing political suicide in the process, this should be relatively easy to accomplish.

“The U.S. Helps Reconstruct the Ottoman Empire” by Robert E. Kaplan; The Gatestone Institute; 5/29/2013.

Since the mid-1990s the United States has intervened militarily in several internal armed conflicts in Europe and the Middle East: bombing Serbs and Serbia in support of Izetbegovic’s Moslem Regime in Bosnia in 1995, bombing Serbs and Serbia in support of KLA Moslems of Kosovo in 1999, bombing Libya’s Gaddafi regime in support of rebels in 2010. Each intervention was justified to Americans as motivated by humanitarian concerns: to protect Bosnian Moslems from genocidal Serbs, to protect Kosovo Moslems from genocidal Serbs, and to protect Libyans from their murderous dictator Muammar Gaddafi.

Other reasons for these interventions were also offered: to gain for the United States a strategic foothold in the Balkans, to defeat communism in Yugoslavia, to demonstrate to the world’s Moslems that the United States is not anti-Moslem, to redefine the role of NATO in the post-Cold War era, among others.

Each of these United States military interventions occurred in an area that had been part of the Ottoman Empire. In each, a secular regime was ultimately replaced by an Islamist one favoring sharia law and the creation of a world-wide Caliphate. The countries that experienced the “Arab Spring” of the 2010s without the help of American military intervention, Tunisia and Egypt, had also been part of the Ottoman Empire, and also ended up with Islamist regimes.

In the United States most discussions of the military conflicts of the 1990s in the Balkans and the “Arab Spring” of the 2010s do not mention that the areas involved had been part of the Ottoman Empire; these included Turkey, the Moslem-populated areas around the Mediterranean, Iraq, the coastal regions of the Arabian Peninsula and parts of the Balkans. In the areas that experienced the Arab Spring Turkey’s role in every instance has been to support the rebels and quickly recognize them as the legitimate government of the country in upheaval.

Turkish leaders do make the connection between the conflicts in the Bosnia, the “Arab Spring” and the Ottoman Empire. Harold Rhode, an American expert on Turkey, has reported:

[President of Turkey] Erdogan’s recent [2011] electoral victory speech puts his true intentions regarding Turkey’s foreign policy goals in perspective. He said that this victory is as important in Ankara as it is in the capital of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Sarajevo, under Ottoman times, an important Ottoman city; that his party’s victory was as important in a large Turkish city Izmir, on the Western Anatolian coast, as it is in Damascus, and as important in Istanbul as it is in Jerusalem….

In saying that this victory is as important in all of these former Ottoman cities, Erdogan apparently sees himself as trying to reclaim Turkey’s full Ottoman past.

The occurrence that since 1990 each European and Middle Eastern country that experienced American military intervention in an internal military conflict or an “Arab Spring” has ended up with a government dominated by Islamists of the Moslem Brotherhood or al-Qaeda variety fits nicely with the idea that these events represent a return to Ottoman rule. Besides being a political empire ruling a territory and its population, the Ottoman Empire claimed to be a Caliphate with spiritual suzerainty over all Moslems – those within its borders and those beyond. Though it might seem strange at first, the idea of advancing the renewal of the Ottoman Empire on two tracks – breaking down the post-Ottoman political structure and promoting a Caliphate which Islamists say they long for – is really quite reasonable.

Just as the Balkan conflicts of the 1990s and the “Arab Spring” of the 2010s considered in historical perspective suggests that Turkey might be attempting to recreate its former empire, consideration of the Turkish Empire in historical perspective suggests the possible partnership of Germany with Turkey in the project given that, from its creation in 1870, Germany viewed Turkey with its empire as a most valuable client and ally. In the view of the leaders of Germany, Turkey was controllable through a combination of economic intercourse, gifts of educational opportunities, provision of technical expertise and administrative aid, as well as bribes to Turkish officials. Germany saw influence over Turkey as a means of influencing Moslems worldwide for its own interests. Thus as the German scholar Wolfgang Schwanitz has shown, during World War I Germany employed the Turkish Caliphate to promote jihad – riot and rebellion – in areas where Moslem populations were ruled by its enemies Russia, France, Britain and Serbia.

Yet in the 50-odd articles collected in an exploration of the awareness on the part of Americans of a possible Turkish connection with the “Arab Spring,” I found not a single mention of “Germany.” Only from a link in one of those articles – to an article on the International Criminal Court (ICC) which, with its indictment of Muammar Gaddafi and issue of a warrant for his arrest, provided the “legal” basis legitimizing NATO’s bombing of Libya — which gave the rebels their victory and ended the Gaddafi regime – did I find mention of Germany. From that article, “A Lawless Global Court” by John Rosenthal (Policy Review Feb. 1. 2004 No.123), one learns that the ICC is a project initiated, promoted and, to a considerable extent, funded by Germany. Given this, the idea that the ICC serves Germany’s purposes is common sense. Through the ICC connection, Germany’s promotion of the “Arab Spring” is clear. Yet it is never or almost never mentioned. This silence calls for explanation.

Later, I did come across an explicit reference to Germany’s role in it — specifically in the war against the Assad regime in Syria — in John Rosenthal’s article “German Intelligence: al-Qaeda all over Syria” in the online Asia Times ­­­­­­­­­­­­ — which reports that the German government supports the rebels and their political arm, the Syrian National Council (SNC), against Assad; that the German government classified [made secret] “by reason of national interest” the contents of several BND (German foreign intelligence) reports that the May 25, 2012 massacre of civilians in the Syrian town of Houla, for which Assad has been blamed, was in fact perpetrated by rebel forces; and that “the German foreign office is working with representatives of the Syrian opposition to develop ‘concrete plans’ for a ‘political transition’ in Syria after the fall of Assad.” So far the German policy of keeping hidden its leadership role in the attempt to reconstitute the Ottoman Empire seems to have succeeded.

Each U. S. military action in Europe and the Middle East since 1990, however, with the exception of Iraq, has followed an overt pattern: First there is an armed conflict within the country where the intervention will take place. American news media heavily report this conflict. The “good guys” in the story are the rebels. The “bad guys,” to be attacked by American military force, are brutally anti-democratic, and committers of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Prestigious public figures, NGOs, judicial and quasi-judicial bodies and international organizations call for supporting the rebels and attacking the regime. Next, the American president orders American logistical support and arms supplies for the rebels. Finally the American president orders military attack under the auspices of NATO in support of the rebels. The attack usually consists of aerial bombing, today’s equivalent of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries’ gunboat which could attack coastal cities of militarily weak countries without fear of retaliation. The ultimate outcome of each American intervention is the replacement of a secular government with an Islamist regime in an area that had been part of the Ottoman Empire.

Why the government of the United States would actively promote German aims — the destruction of Yugoslavia (both World Wars I and II saw Germany invade Serbia) and the re-creation of the Ottoman Empire — is a question that needs to be answered.

Discussion

4 comments for “FTR #819 Proxy War and the Earth Island Boogie (What the Hell Does Dave Emory Mean by “Underground Reich?,” Part 3)”

  1. Very interesting article. Can you please explain what you mean by:

    “The Boston Marathon bomb­ing appears to be “blow­back” from this oper­a­tion, with FBI appar­ently hav­ing cut across ele­ments of the covert oper­a­tion men­tioned above.”

    I’m just not sure of the context of “cut across.” Any help would be appreciated.

    Posted by Sampson | November 14, 2014, 1:08 pm
  2. @Sampson–

    Check out FTR #773.

    http://spitfirelist.com/for-the-record/ftr-773-the-boston-marathon-bombing-the-third-position-and-the-leaderless-resistance-strategy/

    Hopefully this will clarify things for you.

    It’s the best I can do.

    Best,

    Dave

    Posted by Dave Emory | November 14, 2014, 6:16 pm
  3. What could possibly go wrong?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/26/syrian-rebels-qatar-us_n_6225068.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

    OHA, Nov 26 (Reuters) – At a desert base, Gulf state Qatar is covertly training moderate Syrian rebels with U.S. help to fight both President Bashar al-Assad and Islamic State and may include more overtly Islamist insurgent groups, sources close to the matter say.

    The camp, south of the capital between Saudi Arabia’s border and Al Udeid, the largest U.S. air base in the Middle East, is being used to train the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and other moderate rebels, the sources said.

    Reuters could not independently identify the participants in the program or witness activity inside the base, which lies in a military zone guarded by Qatari special forces and marked on signposts as a restricted area.

    But Syrian rebel sources said training in Qatar has included rebels affiliated to the “Free Syrian Army” from northern Syria.

    The sources said the effort had been running for nearly a year, although it was too small to have a significant impact on the battlefield, and some rebels complained of not being taught advanced techniques.

    The training is in line with Qatar’s self-image as a champion of Arab Spring uprisings and Doha has made no secret of its hatred of Assad.

    Small groups of 12 to 20 fighters are identified in Syria and screened by the Central Intelligence Agency, the sources said.

    Once cleared of links with “terrorist” factions, they travel to Turkey and are then flown to Doha and driven to the base.

    GROUND FORCE

    “The U.S. wanted to help the rebels oust Assad but didn’t want to be open about their support, so to have rebels trained in Qatar is a good idea, the problem is the scale is too small,” said a Western source in Doha.

    The CIA declined to comment, as did Qatar’s foreign ministry and an FSA spokesman in Turkey.

    It is not clear whether the Qatari program is coordinated with a strategy of Western and Gulf countries to turn disparate non-Islamist rebel groups into a force to combat the militants.

    Such efforts have been hampered by Western hesitancy about providing significant military aid, because it could end up with extremists. Gulf states dislike the West’s emphasis on fighting Islamic State. Assad is the bigger problem, they say.

    “Moderate rebels from the FSA and other groups have been flown in to get trained in things like ambush techniques,” said a source close to the Qatari government who asked not to be named due to the sensitivity of the topic.

    “The training would last a few months, maybe two or three, and then a new group would be flown in, but no lethal weapons were supplied to them,” one of the sources said.

    SCREENING PROCESS

    As the war against Assad has dragged on, frustrated rebels asked their trainers for more advanced techniques, such as building improvised explosive devices (IEDs), requests which were always denied.

    “They complain a lot and say that going back they need more weapons or more training in IEDs but that’s not something that’s given to them,” said a Qatar-based defense source.

    The Qatar project was conceived before the declaration of the hardline Islamic State, when militants belonging to its predecessor organization were not regarded as an international security threat.

    The group’s rise in Syria and Iraq has hampered the rebellion: Moderate groups cannot fight Assad when the better-armed Islamic State seeks their destruction as it strives to build its “caliphate.”

    In recent weeks, the Qataris, disappointed by lack of progress in the fight against Assad, have started to consider training members of the Islamic Front, a coalition of Islamist rebels less militant than Islamic State or the al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front, but stronger than the FSA.

    None have been trained as yet, but Qatar has sought to identify candidates, the sources say.

    Some analysts say screening Islamic Front fighters would be harder than FSA rebels, since some Islamists have switched between various groups.

    ISLAMIST NETWORK

    Training fighters from Islamic groups could displease fellow Gulf state the United Arab Emirates, which dislikes Qatar’s support for the Muslim Brotherhood’s international Islamist network.

    But Saudi Arabia, which shares the UAE’s mistrust of the Brotherhood, is more indulgent of moderate Islamist forces when it comes to fighting Assad, diplomats say.

    Asked about the Qatari training, a Saudi defense source said: “We are not aware of this training camp, but there’s one thing we agree on: Assad needs to go and we would not oppose any action taken towards that goal.”

    To Qatar, ousting Assad remains a priority and youthful Emir Sheik Tamim has said that military efforts to tackle Islamic State will not work while the Syrian president remains in power.

    A source who works with rebel groups said Qatar had delivered weapons, mostly mortar bombs, to the Islamic Front and some FSA brigades about two months ago and had paid some salaries for Islamic Front groups. (Additional reporting by Dasha Afanasieva in Istanbul and Phil Stewart in Washington; Editing by William Maclean and Giles Elgood)

    Also on HuffPost:

    Posted by Tiffany Sunderson | November 26, 2014, 3:57 pm
  4. How to stick it to Marathon Truthers…

    http://www.sfgate.com/nation/article/Boston-Marathon-bombing-defendant-Dzhokhar-5966565.php

    Tsarnaev, 21, wore a black sweater and gray trousers and had a scruffy beard and a curly hairstyle similar to the one seen in earlier photos. He smiled to his attorneys and one patted him on the arm.

    The courtroom was packed with FBI agents, police who worked on the case, and more than a dozen survivors and family members.

    Outside the courthouse, a man who lost his right leg in the bombings had a testy exchange with a small group of protesters holding signs supporting Tsarnaev and questioning whether authorities have proof that he is responsible for the bombings.

    Marc Fucarile held up his prosthetic leg and moved it back and forth toward the demonstrators, saying: “That’s proof right there.”

    Posted by Tiffany Sunderson | December 18, 2014, 4:20 pm

Post a comment