1933key.com U.S. Terror Operation Northwoods

1933key Menu

Operation Northwoods PDF Print E-mail
History - US Terror
See Also Below:

Operation Northwoods Exposed

 

Starring Alex Jones, Jesse Ventura, and James Bamford. Note: The official "Operation Northwoods" document was originally obtained by George Washington University's National Security Archive through the Freedom of Information Act and can be viewed online here: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430

 


Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba

 

Excerpts from declassified 1962 U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Memo

Page 1

 

T O P   S E C R E T
S P E C I A L   H A N D L I N G   N O F O R N


THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF

WASHINGTON 25, D.C.

13 March 1962

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

Subject: Justification for U.S. Military Intervention
         in Cuba (TS)


   1. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the attached
Memorandum for the Chief of Operations, Cuba Project, which
responds to a request of that office for brief but precise
description of pretexts which would provide justification
for US military intervention in Cuba.

   2. The Joint Chiefs of Staff recommend that the
proposed memorandum be forwarded as a preliminary submission
suitable for planning purposes.  It is assumed that there
will be similar submissions from other agencies and that
these inputs will be used as a basis for developing a
time-phased plan.  Individual projects can then be
considered on a case-by-case basis.

   3. Further, it is assumed that a single agency will be
given the primary responsibility for developing military
and para-military aspects of the basic plan.  It is
recommended that this responsibility for both overt and
covert military operations be assigned the Joint Chiefs of
Staff.

                            For the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEWED,
BY JCS ON 21 May 84                [signed]
CLASSIFICATION CONTINUED

                                L. L. Lemnitzer
                                   Chairman
                            Joint Chiefs of Staff

1 Enclosure
  Memo for Chief of Operations, Cuba Project

 


 

Page 6

. . .

RECOMMENDATIONS

8. It is recommended that:

a. Enclosure A together with its attachments should
be forwarded to the Secretary of Defense for
approval and transmittal to the Chief of
Operations, Cuba Project.

b. This paper NOT be forwarded to commanders of
unified or specified commands.

c. This paper NOT be forwarded to US officers
assigned to NATO activities.

d. This paper NOT be forwarded to the Chairman, US
Delegation, United Nations Military Staff
Committee.

. . .


Page 8

DRAFT

      MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

Subject: Justification for U.S. Military Intervention
in Cuba (TS)

1. Reference is made to memorandum from Chief of Operations,
Cuba project, for General Craig, subject: "Operation MONGOOSE",
dated 5 March 1962, which requested brief but precise
description of pretexts which the Joint Chiefs of Staff
consider would provide justifications for US military inter-
vention in Cuba.

2. The projects listed in the enclosure hereto are forwarded
as a prelimiary submission suitable for planning purposes.
It is assumed that there will be similar submissions from
other agencies and that these inputs will be used as a basis
for developing a time-phased plan. The individual projects
can then be considered on a case-by-case basis.

3. This plan, incorporating projects selected from the
attached suggestions, or from other sources, should be
developed to focus all efforts on a specific ultimate
objective which would provide adequate justification for
US military intervention. Such a plan would enable a logical
build-up of incidents to be combined with other seemingly
unrelated events to camoflage the ultimate objective and
create the necessary impression of Cuban rashness and
irresponsibility on a large scale, directed at other
countries as well as the United States. The plan would also
properly integrate and time phase the courses of action to
be pursued. The desired resultant from the execution of
this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent
position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and
irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an inter-
national image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western
Hemisphere.

Appendix to
Enclosure A

5

Page 9

4. Time is an important factor in resolution of the Cuban
problem. Therefore, the plan should be so time-phased that
projects would be operable within the next few months.

5. Inasmuch as the ultimate objective is overt military
intervention, it is recommended that primary responsibility
for developing military and para-military aspects of the plan
for both overt and covert military operations be assigned the
Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Appendix to
Enclosure A
6

Page 10

ANNEX TO APPENDIX TO ENCLOSURE A

PRETEXTS TO JUSTIFY US MILITARY INTERVENTION IN CUBA


(Note: The courses of action which follow are a preliminary
submission suitable only for planning purposes. They are
arranged neither chronologically nor in ascending order.
Together with similar inputs from other agencies, they are
intended to provide a point of departure for the development
of a single, integrated, time-phased plan. Such a plan would
permit the evaluation of individual projects within the context
of cumulative, correlated actions designed to lead inexorably
to the objective of adequate justification for US military
intervention in Cuba).

1. Since it would seem desirable to use legitimate
provocation as the basis for US military intervention in Cuba
a cover and deception plan. to include requisite preliminary
actions such as has been developed in response to Task 33 c,
could be executed as an initial effort to provode Cuban
reactions. Harassment plus deceptive actions to convince the
Cubans of imminent invasion would be emphasized. Our military
posture throughout execution of the plan will allow a rapid
change from exercise to intervention if Cuban responses
justifies.

2. A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned
to take place in and around Guantanamo to give genuine
appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.

a. Incidents to establish a credible attack (not in
chronilogical order):

(1) Start rumors (many). Use clandestine radio.

(2) Land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence"
to stage attack on the base.

(3) Capture Cuban (friendly) sabateurs inside the base.

(4) Start riots near the entrance to the base (friendly Cubans).
Appendix to
Enclosure A
7

Page 11

  (5) Blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires.

(6) Burn aircraft on airbase (sabatage).

(7) Lob morter shells from outside of base into base.
Some damage to installations.

(8) Capture assault teams approaching from the sea
of vicinity of Guantanamo City.

(9) Capture militia group which storms the base.

(10) Sabotage ship in harbor; large fires -- napthalene.

(11) Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals
for mock-victims (may be lieu of (10)).

b. United States would respond by executing offensive
operations to secure water and power supplies, destroying
artillery and mortar emplacements which threaten the base.

c. Commence large scale United States military operations.

3. A "Remember the Maine" incident could be
arranged in several forms:

a. We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and
blame Cuba.

b. We could blow up a drone (unmannded) vessel anywhere
in the Cuban waters. We could arrange to cause such
incident in the vicinity of Havana or Santiago as a
spectacular result of Cuban attack from the air or sea,
or both. The presense of Cuban planes or ships merely
investigating the intent of the vessel could be fairly
compelling evidence that the ship was taken under attack.
The nearness to Havana or Santiago would add credibility
especially to those people that might have heard the
blast or have seen the fire. The US could follow with
an air/sea rescue operation covered by US fighters to
"evacuate" remaining members of the non-existant
crew. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a
helpful wave of national indignation.

4. We could develop a Communist Cuba terror campaign in
the Miami area, in other Flordia cities and even in
Washington.
Appendix to
Enclosure A
8

Page 12

The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees
seeking haven in the United States. We could sink a
boatload of Cubans enroute to Florida (real or simulated).
We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in the
United States even to the extent of wounding in instances
to be widely publicized. Exploding a few plastic bombs in
carefully chosen spots, the arrest of Cuban agents and the
release of prepared documents substantiating Cuban
involvement also would be helpful in projecting the idea of
an irresponsible government.

5. A "Cuban-based, Castro-supported" filibuster
could be simulated against a neighboring Caribbean nation
(in the vein of the 14th of June invasion of the Dominican
Republic). We know that Castro is backing subversive efforts
clandestinely against Haiti, Dominican Republic, Guatemala,
and Nicaragua at present and possible others. These efforts
can be magnified and additional ones contrived for exposure.
For example, advantage can be taken of the sensitivity of
the Dominican Air Force to intrusions within their national
air space. "Cuban" B-26 or C-46 type aircraft could
make cane-burning raids at night. Soviet Bloc incidiaries could
be found. This could be coupled with "Cuban" messages
to the Communist underground in the Dominican Republic and
"Cuban" shipments of arms which would be found, or
intercepted, on the beach.

6. Use of MIG type aircraft by US pilots could provide
additional provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on
surface shipping and destruction of US military drone aircraft
by MIG type planes would be useful as complementary actions.
An F-86 properly painted would convince air passengers that
they saw a Cuban MIG, especially if the pilot of the transport
were to announce such fact. The primary drawback to this
suggestion appears to be the security risk inherent in
obtaining or modifying an aircraft. However, reasonable copies
of the MIG could be purchased from US resources in about three
months.
Appendix to
Enclosure A
9

Page 13

   7. Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft
should appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the
government of Cuba. Concurrently, genuine defections of Cuban
civil and military air and surface craft should be encouraged.

8. It is possible to create an incident which will
demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and
shot down a chartered civil airliner enroute from the United
States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The
destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route
to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college
students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a
common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.

a. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and
numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered
aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in
the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would
be subsituted for the actual civil aircraft and would
be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under
carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered
aircraft would be converted to a drone.

b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual
aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of
Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying
aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly
into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements
will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return
the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft
meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When
over Cuba the drone will being transmitting on the inter-
national distress frequency a "MAY DAY" message
stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The
transmission will be interrupted by the destruction of
aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will
allow IACO radio
Appendix to
Enclosure A
10

Page 14

   stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what
has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to
"sell" the incident.

9. It is possible to create an incident which will make it
appear that Communist Cuban MIGs have destroyed a USAF aircraft
over international waters in an unprovoked attack.

a. Approximately 4 of 5 F-101 aircraft will be dispatched
in trail from Homestead AFB, Florida, to the vicinity of
Cuba. Their mission will be to reverse course and simulate
fakir aircraft for an air defense exercise in southern
Florida. These aircraft would conduct variations of these
flights at frequent intervals. Crews would be briefed to
remain at least 12 miles off the Cuban coast; however, they
would be required to carry live ammunition in the event that
hostile actions were taken by the Cuban MIGs.

b. On one such flight, a pre-briefed pilot would fly
tail-end Charley at considerable interval between aircraft.
While near the Cuban Island this pilot would broadcast that
he had been jumped by MIGs and was going down. No other
calls would be made. The pilot would then fly directly
west at extremely low altitude and land at a secure base, an
Eglin auxiliary. The aircraft would be met by the proper
people, quickly stored and given a new tail number. The
pilot who had performed the mission under an alias, would
resume his proper identity and return to his normal place
of business. The pilot and aircraft would then have
disappeared.

c. At precisely the same time that the aircraft was
presumably shot down a submarine or small surface craft
would disburse F-101 parts, parachute, etc., at
approximately 15 to 20 miles off the Cuban coast and depart.
The pilots retuning to Homestead would have a true story as
far as they knew. Search ships and aircraft could be
dispatched and parts of aircraft found.
Appendix to
Enclosure A
11

Page 15

 

ENCLOSURE B

FACTS BEARING ON THE PROBLEM

   1. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have previously stated*
that US unilateral military intervention in Cuba can be
undertaken in the event that the Cuban regime commits hostile
acts against US forces or property which would serve as an
incident upon which to base overt intervention.

2. The need for positive action in the event that current
covert efforts to foster an internal Cuban rebellion are
unsuccessful was indicated** by the Joint Chiefs of Staff
on 7 March 1962, as follows:

" - - - determination that a credible internal
revolt is impossible of attainment during the next
9-10 months will require a decision by the United States
to develop a Cuban "provocation" as justification
for positive US military action."

3. It is understood that the Department of State also is
preparing suggested courses of action to develop justification
for US military intervention in Cuba.



_____________
* (JCS 1969/303)
** (JCS 1969/313)
Appendix to
Enclosure B
12

The above excerpts are taken from the original 15-page US Government TOP SECRET document, "Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba [including cover memoranda], March 13, 1962," available at the National Security Archive website in pdf format at the following link: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc1.pdf (if you don't have it, download Adobe Acrobat Reader to view pdf formatted files). The introductory text entry point for this document is at Pentagon Proposed Pretexts for Cuba Invasion in 1962 (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/).

More on Wikipedia

 


U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba

By David Ruppe
ABC News

New York, May 1, 2001  In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.

"These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing," Bamford told ABCNEWS.com.

"The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants."

Gunning for War

The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," writes Bamford.

The Joint Chiefs even proposed using the potential death of astronaut John Glenn during the first attempt to put an American into orbit as a false pretext for war with Cuba, the documents show.

Should the rocket explode and kill Glenn, they wrote, "the objective is to provide irrevocable proof -- that the fault lies with the Communists et all Cuba [sic]."

The plans were motivated by an intense desire among senior military leaders to depose Castro, who seized power in 1959 to become the first communist leader in the Western Hemisphere -- only 90 miles from U.S. shores.

The earlier CIA-backed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba by Cuban exiles had been a disastrous failure, in which the military was not allowed to provide firepower. The military leaders now wanted a shot at it.

"The whole thing was so bizarre," says Bamford, noting public and international support would be needed for an invasion, but apparently neither the American public, nor the Cuban public, wanted to see U.S. troops deployed to drive out Castro.

Reflecting this, the U.S. plan called for establishing prolonged military -- not democratic -- control over the island nation after the invasion.

"That's what we're supposed to be freeing them from," Bamford says. "The only way we would have succeeded is by doing exactly what the Russians were doing all over the world, by imposing a government by tyranny, basically what we were accusing Castro himself of doing."

'Over the Edge'

The Joint Chiefs at the time were headed by Eisenhower appointee Army Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer, who, with the signed plans in hand made a pitch to McNamara on March 13, 1962, recommending Operation Northwoods be run by the military.

Whether the Joint Chiefs' plans were rejected by McNamara in the meeting is not clear. But three days later, President Kennedy told Lemnitzer directly there was virtually no possibility of ever using overt force to take Cuba, Bamford reports. Within months, Lemnitzer would be denied another term as chairman and transferred to another job.

The secret plans came at a time when there was distrust in the military leadership about their civilian leadership, with leaders in the Kennedy administration viewed as too liberal, insufficiently experienced and soft on communism. At the same time, however, there real were concerns in American society about their military overstepping its bounds.

There were reports U.S. military leaders had encouraged their subordinates to vote conservative during the election.

And at least two popular books were published focusing on a right-wing military leadership pushing the limits against government policy of the day.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee published its own report on right-wing extremism in the military, warning a "considerable danger" in the "education and propaganda activities of military personnel" had been uncovered. The committee even called for an examination of any ties between Lemnitzer and right-wing groups. But Congress didn't get wind of Northwoods, says Bamford.

"Although no one in Congress could have known at the time," he writes, "Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs had quietly slipped over the edge."

Even after Lemnitzer was gone, he writes, the Joint Chiefs continued to plan "pretext" operations at least through 1963.

One idea was to create a war between Cuba and another Latin American country so that the United States could intervene. Another was to pay someone in the Castro government to attack U.S. forces at the Guantanamo naval base -- an act, which Bamford notes, would have amounted to treason. And another was to fly low level U-2 flights over Cuba, with the intention of having one shot down as a pretext for a war.

"There really was a worry at the time about the military going off crazy and they did, but they never succeeded, but it wasn't for lack of trying," he says.

After 40 Years

Ironically, the documents came to light, says Bamford, in part because of the 1992 Oliver Stone film JFK, which examined the possibility of a conspiracy behind the assassination of President Kennedy.

As public interest in the assassination swelled after JFK's release, Congress passed a law designed to increase the public's access to government records related to the assassination.

The author says a friend on the board tipped him off to the documents.

Afraid of a congressional investigation, Lemnitzer had ordered all Joint Chiefs documents related to the Bay of Pigs destroyed, says Bamford. But somehow, these remained.

"The scary thing is none of this stuff comes out until 40 years after," says Bamford.

 


Operation Northwoods And The Reichstag Fire


By Bill Molson
Online Journal Contributing Writer
May 5, 2002

Operation Northwoods
Could the United States government conceive of carrying out attacks against the American people under the pretext that the attacks came from a foreign enemy? We have to look back only 40 years to find that the answer is yes. 

The plan was called Operation Northwoods and it called for engaging in such unsavory activities as assassination, hijacking airplanes, blowing up ships, orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities, and even blowing up John Glenn's space capsule, while pinning the blame on Fidel Castro. This would whip up necessary public support for a full-scale invasion of Cuba, which the military believed was necessary. These details are revealed in a book entitled Body of Secrets, a book about the National Security Agency, by James Bamford.

"We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," wrote the military, and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

This was not a "rogue" operation, or loners acting outside the government. These plans were devised by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in 1962. The Kennedy administration rejected the plan, but pretext operations would continue to be drawn up as late as 1963. Among these were to create a war between Cuba and another Latin American country so the U.S. could intervene, and paying someone in Castro's government to attack Guantanamo Bay.

The author, in an interview with ABC news, said, "The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but nobody else wants."

It should be noted that it was the objections of Robert McNamara, and his revelation of the plot to Kennedy which prevented this operation from occurring. It was Kennedy McNamara and who rejected the nuclear first strike option during the Cuban Missile crisis and negotiated a peaceful resolution, saving the world from annihilation. These were the so-called "leftists" elements which no longer exist in the executive branch today (either of them). In fact, if there is a conspiracy, it is likely originating from the executive branch.

Then there is the Kennedy assassination itself, which has been examined with exhausting detail over the years, revealing that there were almost certainly conspiratorial elements behind the assassination. This tenet has received widespread acceptance by the public.

Yet despite this, nothing definitive has been brought to light to indict any of the conspirators to this day.

The Rise of Hitler Reichstag Fire 1933

It may be considered crass by some to compare the rise of the current administration to that of Hitler's regime. While no accusations are being made, only the surface historical similarities between those events and now are being considered as merely a cautionary note, and a proof that sometimes a path, once started, leads to an unforeseen conclusion.

There was a great fear in the capitals of Europe at the time from the threat of Communism. Towards the end of World War I, the Bolshevik revolution in Russia toppled the Czar and installed a totalitarian dictatorship. Russia's strategic position and military might were a matter of grave concern. It was felt that the threat of Communism could spread like a virus to all of Europe. It was especially a concern in Russia's perennial enemy Germany, which was plagued by unemployment and labor unrest, and whose currency had become nearly worthless.

In 1933, through a series of backroom deals and political intrigues, Adolf Hitler became the chancellor of a bankrupt, chaotic and divided Germany on the verge of Civil War.

Hitler convinced German President Hindenburg to hold new elections on March 5 of that year, and Hitler believed the Nazi party would gain control of the legislature. The Nazis controlled the courts, and had the backing of the major industrial powers and bankers, who believed Hitler would be "good for business." They blanketed the nation with propaganda from all media outlets.

Then in late February, shortly before the elections, the German parliament building, the Reichstag, was set ablaze by an arsonist.

The arson was blamed on a 24-year-old Dutch Communist named Marianus Van Der Lubbe. He allegedly confessed to the crime and was quickly tried and executed.

The Nazis used the public fear of the Communists to establish their dictatorship. Just as today, the opposition parties were cowed into silence in the face of an external threat. Hitler grabbed more and more power. An emergency decree was passed the very next day that stated:

"Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed."

Similar to today's ongoing and never-ending terror alerts, frenzied news reports of Communist plots continued to circulate in the press. The Nazis vowed to prove the fire was part of a vast Communist plot to take over Germany. Their propaganda emphasized that only they could control the threat to the nation. Despite this effort, they won only 40 percent of the legislature.

As with Bush, Hitler faced increasingly vocal concern about his measures, and an opposition party controlling the legislature. His tactic was to get an enabling act passed, giving him essentially dictatorial powers and rendering the legislature irrelevant.

On March 23, the newly elected Reichstag met in the Kroll Opera House in Berlin to consider passing Hitler's Enabling Act. It was officially called the "Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich." If passed, it would in effect vote democracy out of existence in Germany and establish the legal dictatorship of Adolf Hitler.

Just as today, the public was assured that the sweeping new emergency powers would never be used unjustly against its own citizens. In a speech before the deciding vote, Hitler told the lawmakers, "The government will make use of these powers only insofar as they are essential for carrying out vitally necessary measures . . . The number of cases in which an internal necessity exists for having recourse to such a law is in itself a limited one."

And, much like today, Hitler pledged to end the chronic unemployment facing his country, and to promote peace, not war, with Germany's enemies: Great Britain, France, and the Soviet Union.

The vote was takenó441 for, and only 84, the Social Democrats, against. The Nazis could now control the German political process and declare war at any time, against any foe, without the legislature. Far from aghast, much of the German public would support Hitler and the Nazis through 1945, by which time Germany would be reduced to rubble.

After the war, evidence led historians to concur that the Reichstag fire that the Nazis used so successfully to gain political power was, in fact, planned by the Nazis themselves for that end. Although there is no consensus, a new book published in Germany in 2001 that reexamined all the court evidence (Der ReichstagbrandñWie Geschichte gemacht wird: The Reichstag FireñHow History is Created ), makes a clear and convincing case that the Nazis themselves aided and abetted Van der Lubbe's torching of the Reichstag.

It should be clear from the above that there was no widespread feeling in Germany that it was becoming a dictatorship. Opposition forces were silenced by propaganda and public ostracism. Dissenters were tried in secret and killed, or sent to the camps. No one knew the true motives behind the Nazi party. Money and propaganda were the tools the Nazis used to devastating effect.

People believe that our great nation, which has always been on the right side of history, will never walk that insidious path. But this is more a matter of faith then of fact. Ever since that dark period, historians, writers and philosophers have wrestled with the agonizing question: "How did it happen," and more importantly, "Could it happen again?" We should be asking, "Could it happen here?"

The Scenario

We now know that the military has planned terrorist operations against Americans as a pretext for war. To deny that a 9/11 conspiracy is even possible is, quite simply, to deny history.

What if this time, the plans were carried out? Furthermore, given the after effects, what if this is part of a larger plan to dismantle American democracy? One more catastrophic event, and the U.S. could easily become a dictatorship.

Extreme? Perhaps. But consider the facts:

  • Consider the fact that the anthrax attacks were almost certainly designed to foment war with Iraq, and that the anthrax itself came from U.S. government labs.
  • Consider the fact that stock bets were made with insider knowledge of the attacks, and placed at a bank formerly run by the CIA chief.
  • Consider the fact that the U.S. was planning to attack Afghanistan as early as July.
  • Consider the fact that the U.S. apparently rewarded, and then threatened the Taliban after Bush took office.
  • Consider the fact that the shadow government was activated shortly after the attacks and kept a secret.
  • Consider the fact that the Office of Homeland Security is working on emergency plans involving martial law.
  • Consider the fact that the government can now legally spy on Americans much more easily and without constitutional and legal roadblocks.
  • Consider the fact that the president can define terrorism, and that the attorney general can choose what groups are considered "terrorists" without legal oversight.
  • Consider the Pentagon planning an office to propagandize noncombatants.
  • Consider the fact that Bush's policies now receive unthinking support from the public, even though he received fewer votes than his opponent in the election.
  • Consider the numerous government figures that have said that the "war" will not end in our lifetime.
  • Consider the fact that both Bush and Cheney asked Congress to back off the 9/11 investigations.
  • Consider the fact that Afghanistan is a major prize for the oil industry, and Bush's government is largely oil executives backed by large energy concerns.
  • Consider that the Iran-Contra conspirators drew up plans to declare martial law and suspend the Constitution, and that some of these men are now back in power.
  • Consider that two of the hijackers were wanted by the CIA, and that nine of the hijackers were selected for security screenings but were allowed to board their flights.
  • Consider that terrorism investigators were told to back off investigating the Saudis and Osama bin Laden's siblings.
  • Consider the fact that bin Laden's siblings lived close to CIA headquarters, and near a place listed by four hijackers as their address, and that they were allowed to leave the country while thousands of other Muslims were rounded up.
  • Consider that former president Bush is a known friend of the bin Laden family, and works for a company that had the bin Laden Group as an investor, a company which now makes billions from the war.

If we can spend $70 million to investigate the Whitewater land deal in Arkansas, isn't there enough evidence to warrant an investigation into these 9/11 connections, especially considering the gravity of what we're facing?

If we accept the fact that government agents can mail deadly anthrax to our citizens, as we must at this point, why couldn't they be capable of at least permitting an attack for their own benefit?

What if the former Iran/Contra conspirators decided to take a page from Hitler's playbook and manufacture a crisis? Moreover, a crisis that would give them unquestioning public support and make them very, very rich?

If this is true, these same forces could be conspiring to permit or unleash another, perhaps more horrible, attack on the American people if their hold on power is threatened.

Please don't take my word for it. Make up your own mind, don't let the government or press make it for you. I'm not a journalist. I don't have insider knowledge. I'm just a concerned citizen with a modem who is worried about what is happening to our country. I've included every reference and source I used at the end of every article. I've intentionally relied on well-known respectable news sources. Most of these are available online. Please, please, please, go check them out yourself, and don't let your political or patriotic feelings get in the way. Remember, American democracy and freedom are greater than any president or administration. We are still free. Only we can make sure it stays that way.

 
Copyright © 2017 1933key for Peace Privacy and Protection.
All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer. Fair Use Notice.