The Voice of the White House

Washington, D.C., May 3. 2011: “I have known for quite some time that bin Ladin died of renal failure at a Pakistani military hospital. I got this information from a source in the Pentagon as well as from a Russian contact in their foreign office. It seemed to be general knowledge in certain circles at the time. I know that the “tapes” were prepared by the CIA in a studio in Texas and the actor spoke technically good Arabic but two friends who are fluent in that language said it was literal and not colloquial. What happened to the body I never knew but now I do. But why not show pictures of the corpse to the public? Did the CIA hit team run out of film? My associates all think this is a political ploy designed to boost Obama’s image…which it has.

The CIA recruited bin Laden in July of 1979 and subsequently, he began to recruit Muslim volunteers to fight against the Russian military then occupying Afghanistan. When the Russians finally pulled out of that country, the bin Laden group was heavily armed with American military hardware, weapons and explosives. It should be noted that bin Laden was from a prominent Saudi family and the majority of the terrorists involved in the 9/11 aircraft attacks on American targets were from Saudi Arabia, many supplied with fake identification from the Saudi Ministry of Security. Since the U.S. was buying a great deal of badly needed oil from that country, these inconvenient facts were suppressed.”

Osama bin Laden’s Second Death

May 2. 2011

by Paul Craig Roberts

(Roberts’ following article is so far also posted on the following websites)

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24587

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28009.htm

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/05/02/osama-bin-laden%e2%80%99s-second-death/

——————

If today were April 1 and not May 2, we could dismiss as an April fool’s joke this morning‘s headline that Osama bin Laden was killed in a firefight in Pakistan and quickly buried at sea.  As it is, we must take it as more evidence that the US government has unlimited belief in the gullibility of Americans.

Think about it.  What are the chances that a person allegedly suffering from kidney disease and requiring dialysis and, in addition, afflicted with diabetes and low blood pressure, survived in mountain hideaways for a decade?  If bin Laden was able to acquire dialysis equipment and medical care that his condition required, would not the shipment of dialysis equipment point to his location? Why did it take ten years to find him?

Consider also the claims, repeated by a triumphalist US media celebrating bin Laden’s death, that “bin Laden used his millions to bankroll terrorist training camps in Sudan, the Philippines, and Afghanistan, sending ‘holy warriors’ to foment revolution and fight with fundamentalist Muslim forces across North Africa, in Chechnya, Tajikistan and Bosnia.”  That’s a lot of activity for mere millions to bankroll (perhaps the US should have put him in charge of the Pentagon), but the main question is: how was bin Laden able to move his money about?  What banking system was helping him?  The US government succeeds in seizing the assets of people and of entire countries, Libya being the most recent.  Why not bin Laden’s?  Was he carrying around with him $100 million dollars in gold coins and sending emissaries to distribute payments to his far-flung operations?

This morning’s headline has the odor of a staged event.  The smell reeks from the triumphalist news reports loaded with exaggerations, from celebrants waving flags and chanting “USA USA.”  Could something else be going on?

No doubt President Obama is in desperate need of a victory.  He committed the fool’s error of restarting the war in Afghanistan, and now after a decade of fighting the US faces stalemate, if not defeat.  The wars of the Bush/Obama regimes have bankrupted the US, leaving huge deficits and a declining dollar in their wake.  And re-election time is approaching.

The various lies and deceptions, such as “weapons of mass destruction,” of the last several administrations had terrible consequences for the US and the world.  But not all deceptions are the same.  Remember, the entire reason for invading Afghanistan in the first place was to get bin Laden.  Now that President Obama has declared bin Laden to have been shot in the head by US special forces operating in an independent country and buried at sea, there is no reason for continuing the war.

Perhaps the precipitous decline in the US dollar in foreign exchange markets has forced some real budget reductions, which can only come from stopping the open-ended wars. Until the decline of the dollar reached the breaking point, Osama bin Laden, who many experts believe to have been dead for years, was a useful bogyman to use to feed the profits of the US military/security complex.

Company Business

One of my contacts in Germany proposed that I might be interested in a very important portion of Mr. Assange’s purloined cables. It seems that this enormous trove was split up at one time, for security reasons, and what my contact had control of was very explosive. The previous releases have caused great diplomatic problems, and in the case of certain Muslim countries, serious domestic upheavals that are still boiling. This particular fundus deals almost entirely with CIA operations globally. I note in passing that the unfortunate Bradley Manning had nothing to do with this issue and, from what I have learned, is a patsy and was being tormented by the military to make statements exculpating the government agencies involved in the initial leaks and putting the blame on others. What I have been reading over for the past 30 days deals with the CIA, its field operations and its political manipulations in Washington. Their connections with the American business community and their shadow deals in the drug field are legion and beyond belief. The Company washes its hands in many waters and they have killed more innocent people than the Dresden raid, toppled governments, murdered opponents. Fomented revolutions (such as the Ukraine ‘Orange Revolution’ murdered half of the Polish government in a rigged plane crash they had hoped to blame on the Russians and many, many more wholesome activities in defense of their, and their friends, pocketbooks. I cannot publish actual documents because they are highly classified but I can, and will, comment on them.

The Second Katyn Massacre

The Incident

A Polish Air Force Tupolev Tu-154 jet carrying the Polish President Kaczynski and many high-ranking Polish dignitaries crashed at Severny airport in Smolensk in western Russia on  April 10, 2010 The weather at the crash site was bad, with thick fog, sleet and a sharp wind.

The airport was surrounded with heavy woods.

When the plane departed from Warsaw it was deemed to be in good operating condition and there had been no fire, explosion or other damage during the course of the flight.

The pilot was as Capt. Arkadiusz Protasiuk, 36, and the co-pilot as Maj. Robert Grzywna, 36. Also on the cockpit crew were Ensign Andrzej Michalak, 36, and Lt. Artur Zietek, 31. The distinguished passenger list also included: the national bank president, the deputy foreign minister, the army chaplain, the head of the National Security Office, the deputy parliament speaker, the Olympic Committee head and at least two presidential aides and 17 lawmakers.

The group had planned to attend a memorial ceremony for the victims of the 1940 Katyn massacre, in which Soviet secret police (NKVD) had killed over fifteen thousan Polish military officers. After the German invasion in 1941, the Germans discovered the mass graves and excvated them. The Soviets then blamed the Germans for the massacre but it was clearly proven that the victims had died long before the Germans exhumed them. Later, Gorbachev admitted that Stalin personally ordered the mass killings (as he had for so many other millions of his countrymen) and a document was found with his signature approving the killings.

Russian airport control officials had repeatedly warned the approaching Polish jet that landing conditions were not good and that an alternate airfield was suggested. As the aircraft approached the field there was a significant drop in altitude in spite of poor visibility and bad weather and the descent was at a speed determined to be double that of a safe rate.

Far too low, the Tupolev jet clipped the trees around the field and crashed.

The Reason

During the Republican administrations of the Bush family, there had been a determined program to encircle the Russian Republic with countries controlled or influenced by the United States. This ring consisted of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, Poland, the Czech Republic, Georgia and various of the former Soviet southern provinces. Further, the CIA had engineered the capture of the important Ukraine country which included the Donets basis industrial area, the vital former Soviet naval base at Sebastopol and control of the oil and gas pipelines which crossed the country. All of the Eastern European states were invited to join NATO and, naturally, allow the U.S. to install missile bases, ostensibly to “protect against terrorist attacks.” As all of these moves were designed to antagonize Russia, the next step was to foment revolt in the rich Ukraine. This was done by the CIA-paid Ukrainians and called the ‘Orange Revolution.’ The Russians eventually responded by their armored incursion into a Georgia heavily laded with American military equipment and troops. The rapid flight of the troops and the abandonment by them of all their equipment was seen as a sign of American weakness and irresolution. This gave pause to many of the bordering countries who now saw America as a paper tiger. As a result, a number of these countries began making up to Russia, Poland being one of them. They reasoned that if America could not defend their interests in Georgia, they could not, or would not, defend the Poles in the event Russia attacked them for allowing hostile missile bases to be installed on their territory. The purpose of the destruction of the plane containing many high Polish dignitaries was to create an incident that could easily, the CIA felt, be blamed on the Russians. This, they reasoned, would pull Poland back into the NATO circle. Like most of the CIA operations, it was a failure.

The Methodology

The Tupolev was not brought down by an internal explosion or a ground-to-air Stinger type missile. Instead, a navigational aid located on the ground known as the automatic Terrain Awareness and Warning System, was tampered with by a Russian CIA employee. This was easily done to the Navigatioonal Aid by use of a GPS device that could be activated without physically entering the system. This caused the plane’s crew to receive incorrect glide slope information  and other false information causing the plane to descend  at a speed double than the safe rate and crashed it straight into the tops of the trees surrounding the airport. Although the passengers were shredded, the plane’s black boxes survived proving that the Russians had indeed warned the pilots their approach was too fast and too low.

Qaddafi Is Said to Survive NATO Airstrike That Kills Son

April 30, 2011

by Kareem Fahim and David D. Kirkpatrick

New York Times

BENGHAZI, Libya — The government of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi said he survived an airstrike in Tripoli late Saturday night that killed one of his sons and three grandchildren, in the sharpest intensification yet of the NATO air campaign intended to pressure the Libyan leader from power.

The son, Seif al-Arab Muammar el-Qaddafi, 29, and the grandchildren, all said to be younger than 12, were possibly the first confirmed casualties in the airstrikes on the Libyan capital. And while the deaths could not be independently verified, the campaign against Libya’s most densely populated areas raised new questions about how broadly NATO is interpreting its United Nations mandate to protect civilians.

It is the second airstrike in seven days to hit a location intimately close to the Libyan leader, following a midnight attack last week that destroyed an office building in his compound where he and his aides sometimes work.

In a news conference early Sunday morning in Tripoli, a Qaddafi government spokesman called the strike an illegal attack. “This was a direct operation to assassinate the leader of this country,” said the spokesman, Moussa Ibrahim.  “This is not permitted by international law. It is not permitted by any moral code or principle.” He said that the colonel and his wife, who were staying at the house along with “friends and family,” were not hurt.

American and NATO officials have said they are not seeking to kill Colonel Qaddafi, and some have suggested it might not be very easy. But frustrated by the evasion and resilience of Colonel Qaddafi’s military, NATO has pledged to step up its strikes on the broader instruments of his power, including state television facilities and command centers in the capital.

In a news release, the NATO mission’s operational commander, Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard, said he was aware of the reports of Qaddafi family deaths but called them unconfirmed. He added: “All NATO’s targets are military in nature and have been clearly linked to the Qaddafi regime’s systematic attacks on the Libyan population and populated areas. We do not target individuals.”

A NATO official in Naples, Italy, reached by e-mail and responding on condition of anonymity, said that allied planners had not known Qaddafi family members were in the building that was attacked, which the official described as a command and control center. The official would not specify the nationality of the aircraft or pilots that carried out the strike.

In a video broadcast by the satellite channel Al Jazeera, Libyan officials showed reporters what they said was the destroyed house, a large crater, crumbled concrete and twisted metal, and someone dusting off what appeared to be an unexploded bomb.

It is not the first time Colonel Qaddafi has survived such a close call. In 1986, the United States struck his compound in retaliation for a terrorist attack on a German nightclub frequented by American service members. Colonel Qaddafi has incorporated his survival into his cult of personality, preserving the wreckage of the building as a “Museum of Resistance” and erecting a statue of a giant fist grabbing an American warplane.

Although several of Colonel Qaddafi’s seven sons and one daughter play major roles in the Libyan economy and government (including an older brother with a similar name, Seif al-Islam el-Qaddafi), the son reported killed had been considered a black sheep, believed to spend much of his time in Munich. Many Libyans said they had never seen his picture. In 2007, the German newspaper Der Spiegel reported that he had been briefly detained by the Munich police after getting into a fight with a nightclub bouncer; no charges were filed.

In Benghazi, the de facto rebel capital in eastern Libya, and in Misurata, a western city that Colonel Qaddafi’s forces have besieged for months, celebratory gunfire rang out and explosions could be heard.

But even then, doubts lingered in Benghazi about whether the news was true:  in interviews, residents said they were happy but suspected a ploy by Colonel Qaddafi to win sympathy. Ramadan el-Sheikhy, who said his brother was killed in one of Colonel Qaddafi’s prisons, said any sympathy was misplaced.  “I was truly happy at the news,” he said. “Hopefully, he felt the pain of having a relative killed.”

Earlier Saturday, NATO officials had rejected an offer by Colonel Qaddafi to call a cease-fire and negotiate as false. The proposal was delivered in a rambling and often defiant speech, broadcast over Libyan state television, in which Colonel Qaddafi insisted he would never leave Libya.

“Come France, Italy, U.K., America, come, we’ll negotiate with you,” Colonel Qaddafi said. “You lie and say I’m killing my own people. Show us the bodies.”

The speech, which was broadcast at about 2:30 a.m. Saturday, was the latest in a series of proclamations from the Libyan leader, and it was made as NATO forces said they would broaden their list of targets to include palaces, communication centers and other administrative buildings that Colonel Qaddafi relies on to maintain power Colonel Qaddafi repeated his assertions that the rebels belonged to Al Qaeda or were terrorists and mercenaries, even as he appealed to them to lay down their weapons.

“Qaddafi doesn’t have the power, he doesn’t have the position to leave,” he said of himself. “With my rifle, I will fight for my country.”

There were few signs that he intended to ease the military pressure on his opponents. A rebel military spokesman said that Qaddafi forces began an assault early Saturday on the eastern towns of Jalu and Awjilah, about 120 miles south of the city of Ajdabiya, attacking in trucks mounted with antiaircraft guns and Grad rockets.

The spokesman, Col. Ahmed Omar Bani, said 5 civilians had been killed in the fighting and 10 had been wounded.

The attack, which could not immediately be confirmed, seemed to follow an emerging pattern in the conflict in which the rebels have stepped up their resistance in the west — in the Nefusa mountain region, along the Tunisian border and in the strategic port city of Misurata. At the same time, Colonel Qaddafi’s forces have made harassing raids on poorly defended towns near the eastern oil fields in recent weeks, at times straining the rebels’ efforts to keep producing oil.

The rebels have said that in the coming days they will appoint a new defense minister to replace Omar al-Hariri, a former political prisoner who occupied a largely ceremonial role in the rebels’ transitional government. They were hoping that the appointment of a civilian would impose a measure of organization on an inexperienced fighting force that has been plagued by setbacks on the eastern front and infighting in its upper ranks.

Fighting continued for Misurata, and early Saturday, large explosions on the outskirts shook the city. Rebels later said they were NATO airstrikes.

The pro-Qaddafi forces resumed shelling and firing rockets into the city in the morning and again late at night. At least 15 people were reported killed, including at least five rebel fighters, an old man who was struck by shrapnel, and a young father of four children.

The young man’s children and his wife were all wounded. They huddled at a Red Crescent clinic, unaware he was dead. “It is not easy to tell them,” said Absalom Essid, who stood at the door to the room where the dead man’s wife was being treated.

At another clinic, the wounded included a baby girl who appeared to be about 10 months old and suffered a broken leg. She was teary-eyed with a pacifier in her mouth as doctors prepared to set the bone.

Kareem Fahim reported from Benghazi, and David D. Kirkpatrick from Cairo. C. J. Chivers contributed reporting from Misurata, Libya, and Eric Schmitt from Washington

Comment: Colonel Qaddafi is a sadistic, murderous old psychotic who killed anyone who got in his way, including Americans. He blew up commercial aircraft (the Lockerbie incident) and a Berlin disco (the La Belle) that catered to American soldiers but our government never responded other than with the usual useless huffy diplomatic notes and vague threats. Now, the old fuck is getting back what he dealt out and there is a good deal of pleasure in reading about the missile attacks on his residences and offices and, even more delightful, to read that his offspring are being splattered all over the walls of their homes. A team of SEALS or some more murderous British group should grab him, strip him naked and set him on fire in public after breaking his arms and legs. As vile as such creatures are, the fact that the American government deals with them and protects them is even worse. He who touches pitch shall be defiled! Ed

‘Don’t ask’: Obama wants rule to remain awhile

April 30, 2011

by Bob Egelko

San Francisco ChronicleSan Francisco Chronicle April 29, 2011 04:00 AM Copyright San Francisco Chronicle. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration wants a federal appeals court to maintain the ban on openly gay service members until the Pentagon is ready for them, probably by the end of the year, and to reject a demand for an immediate halt to “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

In a filing late Thursday, the Justice Department asked the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco to suspend legal proceedings while the government implements a federal law repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the 1993 statute barring military service by gays and lesbians who disclose their sexual orientation.

President Obama signed the repeal in December. It takes effect 60 days after he and the Pentagon certify that it will not interfere with military effectiveness or recruiting.

The Justice Department said retraining of current troops should be mostly done by midsummer, and the administration has promised to complete the process before next year.

“It is well within Congress’ broad constitutional authority over military affairs to establish a brief interim period for transition and implementation of a change of policy throughout the armed forces,” government lawyers argued.

The call for a waiting period didn’t sit well with Log Cabin Republicans, the gay-rights organization that challenged the 1993 law.

“It is hard to believe that the government is still fighting this case (and) still arguing that the court should defer to Congress,” said the group’s lawyer, Dan Woods.

He said the military continues to reject openly gay and lesbian applicants despite a federal judge’s ruling declaring the law unconstitutional. Woods cited the case of Katie Miller, a high-ranking West Point cadet and a lesbian who left the military academy last year because of the policy and was turned down for readmission this month.

U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips of Riverside ruled in September that the “don’t ask” law violated service members’ privacy and freedom of speech and reduced military effectiveness because it led to skilled personnel being discharged.

Phillips issued an injunction in October halting discharges under the law, but the Ninth Circuit appeals court has suspended her order while it considers the case.

E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com.

This article appeared on page A – 10 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Texas bill would make invasive pat-downs a felony

April 29, 2011

by Angela K. Brown

Washington Post

FORT WORTH, Texas — A former Miss USA’s tearful claim that she was groped during a pat-down at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport could be a criminal matter under a bill gaining momentum in the Texas Legislature.

The proposed Texas law, aimed at people conducting security checkpoints at airports and public buildings, would make it a felony to intentionally touch someone’s private areas — even on top of clothing — unless the officer or agent has probable cause to believe the person is carrying something illegal.

State Rep. David Simpson, R-Longview, who sponsored the bill, said Friday that the invasive pat-down searches at airports nationwide are a violation of the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches. Last fall the Transportation Security Administration implemented a new pat-down procedure that includes a security worker running a hand up the inside of passengers’ legs and along the cheek of the buttocks, as well as making direct contact with the groin area.

“We’re taking away people’s dignity and freedom,” said Simpson, whose bill was approved in committee and is now awaiting debate by the full House. Simpson has 70 co-authors on the bill, which is more than 90 percent of the votes needed to pass it. The bill then would go to the Texas Senate for consideration.

Simpson insists that his law would pass muster, even though federal law requires all airline passengers to undergo a screening, which sometimes involves a pat-down. If the bill becomes Texas law, the only way a TSA agent can avoid fear of prosecution is if a traveler gives written consent to the pat-down search after being fully informed of the procedures, Simpson said.

The TSA does not comment on pending legislation, said Nicholas Kimball, an agency spokesman.

“We wish we lived in a world where security procedures weren’t necessary, but that simply isn’t the case,” Kimball said. “We know that terrorists continue trying to manipulate societal norms to evade detection and the measures in place are the best tools currently available to mitigate risk. As we explore ways to improve our approach and become more risk-based and intelligence-driven, we welcome travelers’ feedback and appreciate their understanding.”

Susie Castillo, who was crowned Miss USA in 2003 representing Massachusetts, said she was “molested” during a security pat-down at DFW Airport on April 21. In a video she taped minutes afterward, a tearful Castillo said she had opted against walking through the body scanner, and then a female TSA agent touched her crotch four times during the pat-down.

Castillo said this pat-down was different than those at other airports during her frequent travels. Castillo, now an actress, did not say she felt that she was being singled out.

“I’m hoping that other people that feel violated as an American will make these complaints and … maybe something will change in the future,” Castillo said in the video. “Hopefully they will hear me loud and clear.”

TSA spokesman Luis Casanova said the screener was questioned and did the pat-down correctly, but apologized for any discomfort to Castillo.

According to the TSA, 898 people who underwent or witnessed a pat-down complained to the agency from November through March, and 252 million travelers were screened during that period. The TSA says less than 3 percent of travelers undergo pat-downs, including those who opt out of a body scanner or when it detects a problem and those who require an additional screening when a metal detector goes off.

Since the new anti-terrorism screening measures took effect last year, the American Civil Liberties Union has reported receiving more than 1,000 complaints. Those travelers claim that TSA agents have patted their genitals, run fingers through their hair or along their bras or waistbands.

In Alaska, 59 of the 60 lawmakers have asked a U.S. Senate committee to hold hearings in that state on what they call the “often invasive procedures” used by the TSA, and they’re researching what they can do on a state level.

“You shouldn’t have to sacrifice your dignity when you travel, and air travel is such an important part of travel in Alaska,” said Mark Gnadt, press secretary for House Democrats in the Alaska Legislature.

At least two federal lawsuits have been filed over the pat-downs.

Associated Press writer Chris Tomlinson in Austin contributed to this report.

Arab Pipelineistan’s high stakes
May 1, 2011

by Pepe Escobar

Asia Times

Once again this week the Arab Gas Pipeline had to be shut down – with no gas flowing to Israel and Jordan. An “unknown armed gang” bombed the al-Sabil gas terminal near the coastal city of el-Arish, less than 350 kilometers northeast of Cairo in the Sinai Peninsula.

On March 27, an “unknown armed gang” tried to blow up the terminal but failed. On February 5, they did succeed – the flow of gas to Israel and Jordan was interrupted.

The Sinai Peninsula is a de facto red zone. Local Bedouins rule. Security is spotty. Weapons smuggled to Gaza and other parts of the Middle East flow through the Sinai – that is, within striking distance of the Arab Gas Pipeline.

The Arab Gas Pipeline is the star of Arab Pipelineistan – linking Egyptian gas to the north to Israel and to the south towards the Gulf of Aqaba and from there across Jordan to Syria and via Damascus towards Lebanon.

The Arab Gas Pipeline has the potential to grow east and west – turbulent politics and economic allowing. From Damascus it could go to southern Turkey, and then connect to the perennially troubled, still in the making, Nabucco project exporting gas to Europe. The other possibility is an extension towards Italy and Spain including Libyan and Algerian gas.

In strategic el-Arish, the Arab Gas Pipeline breaks in two; one of the arms goes northeast, to the Israeli city of Ashkelon. The el-Arish-Ashkelon pipeline has been supplying Israel since 2008. For the moment, Israel gets 1.7 billion cubic meters a year; before Tahrir Square there were plans to increase it to 2.1 billion. As it stands, Egypt supplies about 10% of Israel’s energy mix, and is responsible for over 30% of Israel’s electricity. Over half of the total natural gas consumed in Israel comes from Egypt.

Few may know that Egypt – with 63 billion cubic meters a year – is one of the largest producers of natural gas in the Maghreb. In Africa, it’s only behind Algeria (80 billion). While Egypt is increasing production, Algeria is decreasing. Cairo and Algiers are fierce competitors in the natural gas market. At the same time, Egypt is also investing heavily in liquefied natural gas (LNG) – to be transported by sea – so it may offset its dangerous dependency on Middle Eastern Pipelineistan.

Egyptian gas exports are regionally strategic – but especially to Israel. Sabotage may hurt the Israeli economy and its military/energy security. Bit it also hurts Egypt’s regional and international credibility as a gas hub; the Hosni Mubarak regime was very keen to cultivate this image.

Because president Anwar Sadat and then Mubarak killed any attempts to diversify the Egyptian economy, the country has to rely on tourism; remittances from Egyptian workers abroad; tolls in the Suez Canal; payment for dodgy privatizations; and their oil and especially gas exports. A hefty chunk of all these proceeds ended up in Mubarak’s Swiss banks accounts.

No wonder Israel defended Mubarak until the last minute. Mubarak’s sons Gamal and Alaa pocketed hundreds of millions of dollars in “commissions” from the sale of Egyptian gas to Israel. As much as Tel Aviv paid these “commissions” to get gas at a ridiculously low rate, average Egyptians could not even dream of enjoying at least some financial benefit for working in the gas fields. No wonder in mid-April new Egyptian Prime Minister Essam Sharaf ordered a serious review of the pricing deals with Israel.

The new gas rush

Now there’s another huge game at play in Arab Pipelineistan. Texas-based Nobel Energy has found massive natural gas deposits – trillions of cubic meters – in the eastern Mediterranean. The waters encompass all number of key regional players; Israel, Lebanon, Cyprus, Gaza, Egypt and Turkey. No treaties demarcate these territorial waters. What everyone may eventually enjoy is no less than over 300 years of assured energy; at least in theory, that would mean the end of a regional energy war.

Turkey is at the moment involved in a complex push to develop regional Pipelineistan not only along an east-west axis but north-south as well; this means it must cultivate a complex web of relations with no less than nine countries – Russia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt. Before Tahrir Square, serious negotiations were already ongoing regarding an extended Arab Pipelineistan that could link Cairo, Amman, Damascus, Beirut and Baghdad. This would certainly do more to unify and develop the Middle East than any “peace process”.

The same applies to the newfound eastern Mediterranean gas. An ideal world would point to multi-nation corporation in charge of exploiting these new gas finds, maybe located in Cyprus, which is neutral and a member of the European Union (EU) to boot. That would simplify the sale of much of this gas to energy-hungry Europe, thus alleviating its dependency on Russian gas.

Russia’s energy giant Gazprom anyway won’t fail to be part of the action. It has already offered Lebanon its prospection services. China is already on the spot, ready to buy from anyone. For the moment, the heart of the action in this New Gas Rush is Cyprus airport. The Delek corporation – which controls the second-largest quota, after Noble Energy, of the extraction rights in Israel – wants to install a LNG refinery in Cyprus, on a site strategically located between two American naval bases.

So reality will be messy – especially with Israeli/US interests trying to get the upper hand while Arab governments think they could use this new gas bonanza as a way to pierce the economic/military hegemony of Israel.

At least one front of the great 2011 Arab revolt might seem to be spelling a rosy future, as in “natural gas”; commodity, capital and infrastructure leading to development for all. Or maybe not; and this will turn out to be yet another lethal chapter of ongoing energy wars.

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His new book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com

Iraq War Facts, Results & Statistics at March 31, 2011

4,444 US Soldiers Killed, 32,051 Seriously Wounded

U.S. SPENDING IN IRAQ

Spent & Approved War-Spending – About $900 billion of US taxpayers’ funds spent or approved for spending through November 2010.

Lost & Unaccounted for in Iraq – $9 billion of US taxpayers’ money and $549.7 milion in spare parts shipped in 2004 to US contractors. Also, per ABC News, 190,000 guns, including 110,000 AK-47 rifles.

Missing – $1 billion in tractor trailers, tank recovery vehicles, machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and other equipment and services provided to the Iraqi security forces. (Per CBS News on Dec 6, 2007.)

Mismanaged & Wasted in Iraq – $10 billion, per Feb 2007 Congressional hearings

Halliburton Overcharges Classified by the Pentagon as Unreasonable and Unsupported – $1.4 billion

Amount paid to KBR, a former Halliburton division, to supply U.S. military in Iraq with food, fuel, housing and other items – $20 billion

Portion of the $20 billion paid to KBR that Pentagon auditors deem “questionable or supportable” – $3.2 billion

U.S. 2009 Monthly Spending in Iraq – $7.3 billion as of Oct 2009

U.S. 2008 Monthly Spending in Iraq – $12 billion

U.S. Spending per Second – $5,000 in 2008 (per Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on May 5, 2008)

Cost of deploying one U.S. soldier for one year in Iraq – $390,000 (Congressional Research Service)

TROOPS IN IRAQ

Troops in Iraq – Total 47,000 U.S. troops. All other nations have withdrawn their troops.

U.S. Troop Casualties – 4,444 US troops; 98% male. 91% non-officers; 82% active duty, 11% National Guard; 74% Caucasian, 9% African-American, 11% Latino. 19% killed by non-hostile causes. 54% of US casualties were under 25 years old. 72% were from the US Army

Non-U.S. Troop Casualties – Total 316, with 179 from the UK

US Troops Wounded – 32,051, 20% of which are serious brain or spinal injuries. (Total excludes psychological injuries.)

US Troops with Serious Mental Health Problems – 30% of US troops develop serious mental health problems within 3 to 4 months of returning home

US Military Helicopters Downed in Iraq – 75 total, at least 36 by enemy fire

IRAQI TROOPS, CIVILIANS & OTHERS IN IRAQ

Private Contractors in Iraq, Working in Support of US Army Troops – More than 180,000 in August 2007, per The Nation/LA Times.

Journalists killed – 146, 97 by murder and 49 by acts of war

Journalists killed by US Forces – 14

Iraqi Police and Soldiers Killed – 9,889 as of Jan 31, 2011

Iraqi Civilians Killed, Estimated – On October 22, 2010, ABC News reported “a secret U.S. government tally that puts the Iraqi (civilian) death toll over 100,000,” information that was included in more than 400,000 military documents released by Wikileaks.com.

A UN issued report dated Sept 20, 2006 stating that Iraqi civilian casualties have been significantly under-reported. Casualties are reported at 50,000 to over 100,000, but may be much higher. Some informed estimates place Iraqi civilian casualities at over 600,000.

Iraqi Insurgents Killed, Roughly Estimated – 55,000

Non-Iraqi Contractors and Civilian Workers Killed – 572

Non-Iraqi Kidnapped – 306, including 57 killed, 147 released, 4 escaped, 6 rescued and 89 status unknown.

Daily Insurgent Attacks, Feb 2004 – 14

Daily Insurgent Attacks, July 2005 – 70

Daily Insurgent Attacks, May 2007 – 163

Estimated Insurgency Strength, Nov 2003 – 15,000

Estimated Insurgency Strength, Oct 2006 – 20,000 – 30,000

Estimated Insurgency Strength, June 2007 – 70,000

QUALITY OF LIFE INDICATORS

Iraqis Displaced Inside Iraq, by Iraq War, as of May 2007 – 2,255,000

Iraqi Refugees in Syria & Jordan – 2.1 million to 2.25 million

Iraqi Unemployment Rate – 27 to 60%, where curfew not in effect

Consumer Price Inflation in 2006 – 50%

Iraqi Children Suffering from Chronic Malnutrition – 28% in June 2007 (Per CNN.com, July 30, 2007)

Percent of professionals who have left Iraq since 2003 – 40%

Iraqi Physicians Before 2003 Invasion – 34,000

Iraqi Physicians Who Have Left Iraq Since 2005 Invasion – 12,000

Iraqi Physicians Murdered Since 2003 Invasion – 2,000

Average Daily Hours Iraqi Homes Have Electricity – 1 to 2 hours, per Ryan Crocker, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq (Per Los Angeles Times, July 27, 2007)

Average Daily Hours Iraqi Homes Have Electricity – 10.9 in May 2007

Average Daily Hours Baghdad Homes Have Electricity – 5.6 in May 2007

Pre-War Daily Hours Baghdad Homes Have Electricity – 16 to 24

Number of Iraqi Homes Connected to Sewer Systems – 37%

Iraqis without access to adequate water supplies – 70% (Per CNN.com, July 30, 2007)

Water Treatment Plants Rehabilitated – 22%

RESULTS OF POLL Taken in Iraq in August 2005 by the British Ministry of Defense (Source: Brookings Institute)

Iraqis “strongly opposed to presence of coalition troops – 82%

Iraqis who believe Coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security – less than 1%

Iraqis who feel less ecure because of the occupation – 67%

Iraqis who do not have confidence in multi-national forces – 72%

Prepare for the reign of Charles the Meddler

The notion that the royal family is above politics is arrant nonsense

May 1, 2011

by Nick Cohen

The Observer,

Trying to find an institution absurd enough to represent the false promises of true love and girlish happiness which American society dangled before the young women of the 1920s, Dorothy Parker hit on a Ruritanian monarchy.

Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song,
A medley of extemporanea;
And love is a thing that can never go wrong;
And I am Marie of Romania.

As if to distract us from the thought that Kate Middleton will discover that love is a thing that can always go wrong in the House of Windsor, Buckingham Palace added a Balkan touch to its “fairy-tale wedding”. A man it called “King Constantine of the Hellenes” was in Westminster Abbey. “Crown Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia” and one “King Simeon II of Bulgaria” were included on the guest list, too. And, as if to make Dorothy Parker’s point for her, they were joined by “King Michael I of Romania”.

But while there was a Marie of Romania – queen from 1914 to 1927 – there is no King Michael I. Greece, Bulgaria and Romania all deposed their monarchies, and even after the brutal experience of fascism and communism, no one could persuade their citizens to take them back. Meanwhile, the Palace’s “Alexander of Yugoslavia” not only has no throne, but also claims the title of a country that no longer exists except on old maps of cold war Europe.

The royal family’s willingness to ban Labour prime ministers from the wedding has already told us much about the monarchy’s ideology. After that cheap snub, I hope to hear less self-deluding babble from Labour leaders about the Windsors being “above politics”. If they cannot see that royal rule is a justification for conservatism, surely they must now realise that royals are Tories and their political opponents.

The Windsors’ decision to address deposed monarchs as if they were sovereigns rather than private citizens is, if anything, more revealing. A king is still a king in their eyes. Even if “his” people don’t want him, divine right or dead tradition gives him a presumptuous and ineradicable claim to be head of state. Prince Charles almost says as much in his asinine flop of a book, Harmony. You must reject modernity and reason, he urges his future subjects, and “travel back in time to see the world as the ancients saw it”.

I should not patronise the disinherited Balkan royals. They are not Ruritanians. In several respects, they put “our” outfit to shame. Simeon II, or to give him his civilian name Simeon Borisov of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, styled himself “tsar of Bulgaria” while he lived in exile. When he returned to Bulgaria after the fall of the Soviet empire, he left his sense of entitlement behind. He formed a political party, as free citizens in free countries are entitled to do.

Although it was an unashamedly monarchist movement, Simeon never tried to seize the dusty Bulgarian crown when he won power, but ruled as a prime minister under a republican constitution at the beginning of this century. He became ever more unpopular as poverty and corruption grew and retired from public life after his party’s support crashed from 42% to 3%, proving once again the advantage of democracy over its rivals – that the electorate has the power to eject rulers when they fail.

How unlike the political life of our own dear Queen and her offspring. Charles III will claim to be head of state by right rather than by election. Monarchists have been arguing in bad faith during this week of celebration by saying that royalty’s popularity negates the objection that his succession will lack democratic legitimacy. An easy way to silence them is to point to the polls that show the public wants Prince William to succeed his grandmother and ask whether monarchists will accept a modest concession to democracy and agree to Prince Charles stepping aside. They never will in my experience. Even when choice is limited to the gene pool of their own family, the Windsors will not allow the British to choose between the grandson and the son.

Although Harmony was a publishing flop, I urge you to dig through the remainder bins and find a copy. You will then realise that royal intransigence may soon present us with a national embarrassment which will make us forget last week’s undoubtedly perky events.

I already knew that the heir was a mark for every type of homeopathic quack and new age conman, but never realised that he was an open target for cultists as well. His book shows nothing but contempt for the scientific method, seeing it as our curse rather than our salvation. He wants us to return to a pre-Renaissance world and find the shared “sacred geometry” of the vagina in the designs of disparate ancient buildings.

We must then look heavenwards and see mystical significance in the mean orbit of Mercury, which sits “within the orbit of the earth in such a proportion that it fits exactly over the pentagon at the heart of the five-pointed star”.

It is the tale of The Da Vinci Code told by an idiot.

To say that Prince Charles’s views are reactionary is to libel honest conservatives. His hatred of science, his dismissal of technologies that might feed the hungry and heal the sick, his barely disguised admiration for the Middle Ages, when the credulous peasantry picked organic crops and presented them to princes – rather like himself – can be found today only on the extreme right of the green movement.

His courtiers tell the press that his behaviour in no way shows that he is unfit to be king. He may have meddled in politics since the late 1960s, they say, but that does not mean he will carry on meddling when he is head of state. He may have suggested that drinking carrot juice and taking coffee bean enemas may help combat cancer, but that does not mean he will carry on delivering his uninformed and unsought opinions when his mother dies.

He may have ignored his constitutional role in the most outrageous fashion by bombarding ministers with suggestions and objections, but that will cease as well. Even though he is a 62-year-old, set in his cranky ways and surrounded by flatterers, he will change. Trust us, he will.

And I am Marie of Romania.

Conversations with the Crow

When the CIA discovered that their former Deputy Director of Clandestine Affairs, Robert  T. Crowley, had been talking with author Gregory Douglas, they became fearful (because of what Crowley knew) and outraged (because they knew Douglas would publish eventually) and made many efforts to silence Crowley, mostly by having dozens of FBI agents call or visit him at his Washington home and try to convince him to stop talking to Douglas, whom they considered to be an evil, loose cannon.

Crowley did not listen to them (no one else ever does, either) and Douglas made through shorthand notes of each and every one of their many conversation. TBR News published most of these (some of the really vile ones were left out of the book but will be included on this site as a later addendum ) and the entire collection was later produced as an Ebook.

Now, we reliably learn, various Washington alphabet agencies are trying to find a way to block the circulation of this highly negative, entertaining and dangerous work, so to show our solidarity with our beloved leaders and protectors, and our sincere appreciation for their corrupt and coercive actions, we are going to reprint the entire work, chapter by chapter. (The complete book can be obtained by going to:

http://www.shop.conversationswiththecrow.com/Conversations-with-the-Crow-CWC-GD01.htm

Here is the seventieth chapter

Conversation No. 70

Date:  Thursday, February 27, 1997

Commenced: 6:15 PM CST

Concluded: 6:38 PM CST

RTC: Gregory? Have I interrupted your dinner?

GD: Not at all. I eat later, if I think about it that is. I thought you’d be in bed by now, Robert. A problem?

RTC: Actually, yes, there is…or might be. Do you have some time there?

GD: Sure. Not a problem.

RTC: It’s about that Atwood person we spoke of earlier. Remember the one?

GD: Oh, yes, I do remember Atwood. Did old Critchfield off him?

RTC: No, not as I understand but there is unhappiness about Atwood’s proclivity to talk to the wrong people and you are certainly considered the wrong people. By Critchfield’s crowd. Jim does not like me any more over that Angolia business but one of our mutual friends was in touch with me yesterday about this and I thought I ought to discuss it with you. There are, or were, certain aspects to Atwood’s activities, both on and off the board, that there is some anxiety about. It’s known he had very dubious dealings with you six or seven years ago and you are considered to be a loose cannon. Atwood is considered to be a loose mouth and in my calling, that is not considered to be either wise or conducive of a long and happy life. Might I ask you what, if anything, Atwood discussed with you concerning his activities with the Company? Can you recall?

GD: My memory is very good, Robert, as you might have noticed.

RTC: I have. At times a great asset, Gregory, but at other times, a great liability. If you take my meaning?

GD: Oh, I do. Atwood? I got to know him while I was living in Munich in ’65. I was selling German militaria via the Shotgun News….

RTC: And that was….?

GD: Is. It’s a trade paper for gun and military collectors. In Hastings, Nebraska. I was a guest of Franzi von Otting and I used his name. Con premise and he got a percentage of the take. Anyway, Jimmy saw the advert and since he was in Germany, decided to look me up. He wrote and made an appointment and I met him in the lobby of the Vierjahrezeiten.

RTC: Pardon?

GD: A posh Munich hotel. He was staying there with two tarts. Bargirl types if you know what I mean. He was very polite and civil. Slight southern accent. Anyway, we had a long conversation about the collecting trade. Jimmy had written a book on Nazi daggers and was, as he admitted over a drink or two, having these made up in Solingen and selling them. He was making very good money and was highly ambitious. Made up Hermann Goering’s wedding sword and shoved it off on some stupid collector and, as I recall, Hitler’s suicide pistol. A Walther with ivory grips. Got it on the cover of Argosy magazine and sold it to another sucker in Canada. Anyway, we had a talk about creative selling and, as I recall, he was interested in my expertise on the historical aspects. I pointed out to him that in the picture of the alleged Hitler gun, the maker was Walther but their factory was in Ulm, not in what was now the DR. He laughed and said, as I remember, ‘well…you caught me….’ and on we went. I don’t drink very much but he certainly could put it away. And we went out to a restaurant and continued the talking. I learned a lot about him, the more he drank, but he learned nothing about me. Considering everything, that was just as well. I know he had a good opinion of me because in ’90 we went to Austria and dug up some buried Nazi concentration camp loot an SS general buried there in ’45.

RTC: And who might that have been?

GD: A Slovene named Globocnik. Had been the Gauleiter of Vienna until Hitler sacked him for stealing.

RTC: I was told about him. Not a nice person.

GD: No, but you used him after his faked suicide. The Brits sold him to you and you sent him down to Syria to help the rag heads.

RTC: Gregory, you are most interesting and informative. And I hope you are also discreet.

GD: Oh, I can be. Why the interest in Jimmy?

RTC: It has slowly dawned on certain exalted people that perhaps you might have gleaned some forbidden information about brother Atwood in the course of your wild career. Do go on

GD: Well, I don’t know what was, or is, forbidden, and what isn’t.

RTC: Why not just go on and let me be the judge of that. Please continue about Atwood.

GD: I will. Atwood was one of your people and was not only involved in merchandising and otherwise making a profit selling fake German militaria…

RTC: By German, you specifically mean Nazi, don’t you?

GD: Yes, of course. I’ll tell you about the market in a few minutes. Right now, I am going to fill you in on what I learned from James. I give you some background here on the very off chance that you know nothing about it. Since at least 1981 and probably earlier, there exists a worldwide network of ‘free-standing’, or especially and specifically. no direct U.S. government ties companies, including airlines, aviation and military spare parts suppliers, and trading companies, set up that  have been put to good use by the CIA and the U.S. government to illegally ship arms and military spare parts to Iran and to the Contras. And, of course, to smuggle people who can’t go by commercial airlines and, let us not forget, drugs

RTC: I rather wish you would forget about drugs. I don’t think brother Atwood was involved with drugs. Do go on.

GD: Yes. These companies were set up with the approval and knowledge of senior CIA officials and other senior U.S. government officials and staffed primarily by ex-CIA, ex-FBI and ex-military officers. I am correct here?

RTC: Yes. Go on.

GD: You will probably end up hating me if I do, Robert, but I note you asked me to continue.

RTC: I think I am above that, Gregory.

GD: OK. Now let’s look at the Iran Contra business. I know all about at least a part of this so we can go into it a little. Secord’s arms shipments, arraigned through the CIA, transferred weapons destined for Central America to Merex. This was known officially as Merex International Arms and was, and is, based in Savannah. The Merex address was occupied by Combat Military Ordinances Ltd., controlled by Jimmy Atwood. He had been in the Army in MI and then went to work for your people. James was involved in major arms trades with your sponsored international buyers, specifically Middle Eastern Arab states. Monzer Al-Kassar utilized the Merex firm for some of his weapons transactions with the Enterprise.   Now Merex was originally set up, after the war, by old Skorzeny co-worker, one Gerhard Mertins. Gerhard had been  a Hauptmann (captain to you, Robert) in the German paratroopers and got the Knight’s Cross in, I believe, ’45. After the war, Mertins went to work in Bonn and the Merex arms business was considered a CIA proprietary firm. Mertex was close to and worked with the BND, the German intelligence service evolved from the CIA-controlled Gehlen organization. Atwood was involved with Interarmco, run by Samuel Cummings, an Englishman who ran the largest arms firm in the world. Cummings died in Monaco because he had looted his CIA employers and found that principality safer than Warrenton, Virginia. Also connected with Atwood’s firm were Collector’s Armory, run by one Thomas Nelson, whose nickname was ‘Red Nelson’ because of his hair color, not his politics, and a George Petersen of Springfield, Virginia, and one Manny Wiegenberg, a Canadian arms dealer. Jimmy was heavily involved in your support of Canadian separatists and I know something of his role in supplying weapons and explosives to the Quebec Libré movement. The head of your Canada Desk was actively encouraging this group to split away from Canada. I know for a fact that your people do not want ever to mention this little historical aside.

RTC: No, we do not, Go on.

GD:Also, I know all about Atwood’s connections with Skorzeny and the IRA/Provo wing. I can give you chapter and verse on this one if you want it. One of Atwood’s Irish connections is the man who blew up Lord Louis Mountbatten in 1979 and I have a file on this as well in some safe and private place You might also be aware of the shipping of weapons into the southern Mexican provinces by Atwood and his Guatemala based consortium. Atwood had a number of ex-Gestapo and SD people on board, some of whom were wanted. I recall a former SS officer, Frederich Schwend who worked with your people and was down in Lima. Schwend had been trained by the OSS in the early 1940s after he had informed Allen Dulles that the German SS had hidden millions in gold, cash, and loot as the European war was winding down. Atwood knew about the Weissensee gold hoard that Müller told me about. Jimmy knew about it but I had the overlay so he courted me and we ended up, shovels in hand, in the beautiful mountains in ’90.

RTC: Thee are conflicting stories about that business. You murdered two British people as I understand it.

GD: No such thing, Robert. As I understand it, and I was there, they fell off the boat in the middle of the Caribbean. Such lies your people make up.

RTC: Well, there are always two sides to every story, Gregory. You are better than two cups of coffee, I must say. I think I ought to get some Pepto Bismol pretty soon. After the Treasure Island adventure, what happened next?

GD: To Atwood? Well, as Jimmy told me, about 1992, he and your Jimmy Critchfield, along with a Russian Jew, formed a partnership in order to obtain a number of obsolete Soviet atomic artillery shells which they then sold to the Pakistanis.  I think the two of them kept the money and no one ever saw the Jew again. If you don’t know this, I can tell you that both Critchfield and the Interarmco people had supplied weapons to the rebels in Afghanistan during their long and vicious guerrilla activities against the Soviet Union. Critchfield also worked with the Dalai Lama of Tibet in a guerrilla war against Communist China and headed a CIA task force during the Cuban missile crisis. He ran regional agency operations when the U.S. and the Soviets raced to secure satellites first in Eastern Europe, then in the Middle East. And note that in the early 1960s, Critchfield recommended to the CIA that the United States support the Baath Party, which staged a 1963 coup against the Iraqi government that the CIA believed was falling under Soviet influence. Critchfield later boasted, during the Iran-Iraq war that he and the CIA had created Saddam Hussein.

RTC: Gregory, where in the sweet hell did you get all of this?

GD: From Atwood when he was drunk.

RTC: You’ve just guaranteed that he will pass to his reward very soon. Does that bother you?

GD: I never liked him. He tried to rip me off once but he was so crude about it that I have no respect for him. Shall I go on?

RTC: I have approach-avoidance conflicts here, Gregory. You might as well ruin the rest of my evening. Proceed.

GD: Are you sure? You don’t sound too happy.

RTC: I am not but do go on.

GD: As you wish. When Arab oil became paramount, your Critchfield became your national intelligence officer for energy and was also an energy policy planner at the White House. He also fronted a dummy CIA corporation in the Middle East known as Basic Resources, which was used to gather OPEC-related intelligence for the Nixon administration. . Critchfield was the chief of the CIA’s Near East and South Asia division in the 1960s and a national intelligence officer for energy as the oil shortage crisis began in the early 1970s. Of course your people, along with the oil barons, forced the price of oil up and up. My, I wonder how much money you all made. Oh well, not important here. Critchfield retired in the mid ‘70s and ended up as both a consultant and the CEO of Tetra Tech International, a Honeywell Inc. subsidiary and which managed oil, gas, and water projects in the strategic Masandam Peninsula. This, in case your geography is weak, is located on the Strait of Hormuz, through which much of the West’s oil is transported. And at the same time, Critchfield was a primary adviser to the Sultan of Oman, focusing on Middle East energy resources, especially those in Oman.

RTC: I should never have asked you about this.

GD: The Bible says ask and ye shall receive.

RTC: Yes. We can forget the Bible here. It has no part in the intelligence business. You mentioned Merex. Do you know of other friendly assets?

GD: Surely, Try Aero Systems, Arrow Air, Global International, and how about Zenith?

RTC: Did you get these names from Atwood?

GD: Of course I did. I told you Jimmy was not discreet while he was drinking. I listened to his tales of self-importance and remembered it all. Oh, and I write it up as well.

RTC: Gregory, for the Lord God’s sake, if not mine, or more important, yours, do not discuss any of this with anyone else, your son or people like Willis Carto. If you aren’t careful, Critrchfield will have you eliminated. I shall have to warn him off on that topic but…I mean why would Atwood tell you such terrible things and if he told you, who else could he have told?

GD: One of his German whores, probably. Jimmy goes on and on.

RTC: So I note. And we can ring the curtain down on that one ASAP.

GD: From your reaction, Robert, I assume Jimmy was accurate.

RTC: No comment but Atwood is a dead man.

GD: Well, I might have gotten my insights from the back of a Wheaties’ box but Jimmy is a better candidate. Do you know why I dislike Jimmy and would frame his death notice? His wife stuck with him when he was arrested for tax evasion in smuggling in the ‘60s and as a mark of his appreciation, he deserted her and his two daughters to run off with one of his bar girls. The rest of his activities are one thing but I do not tolerate such domestic treachery. Do you think I’m being too critical?

RTC: What a question. Who cares about his wife and children? This man has gone way beyond the bounds. Way beyond. Of course I believe you. You could never have made all that up and I can assure you it was never in the New York Times. They might know some of it but they wouldn’t dare publish it. No, you got it from Atwood or someone connected with him. Ah, well, I did ask and I did receive. They hate you Gregory, they hate you with a passion but at the same time, they are scared shitless of you. They would have killed you some time ago but others counseled them against it. Who knows what you put down on paper? If you were run over by a truck in the middle of a shopping mall or attacked and eaten by a leopard in your own living room, who knows what might find its way out of some hiding hole and into the public? The public is happy with its football games and beer so we had best not disturb them with such stories.

GD: They might make a good movie out of all this.

RTC: Never, Gregory, I can promise you that. A studio that even considered this would be bankrupt within a few months. No, none of this will ever see the light of day and if you want to continue walking around, remember that silence is golden.

GD: I have no problem with gold. Just think of all that looted concentration camp gold Jimmy and I dug up.

RTC: Yes and I understand you cheated him out of his share.

GD: When thieves fall out, Robert, honest men prosper.

RTC: Meaning no disrespect but do you consider yourself to be an honest man?
GD: Selectively, Robert, selectively. And Jimmy?

RTC: Don’t make book on his seeing Christmas.

(Concluded at 6:38 PM CST)

Dramatis personae:

James Jesus Angleton: Once head of the CIA’s Counterintelligence division, later fired because of his obsessive and illegal behavior, tapping the phones of many important government officials in search of elusive Soviet spies. A good friend of Robert Crowley and a co-conspirator with him in the assassination of President Kennedy

James P. Atwood: (April 16, 1930-April 20, 1997) A CIA employee, located in Berlin, Atwood had a most interesting career. He worked for any other intelligence agency, domestic or foreign, that would pay him, was involved in selling surplus Russian atomic artillery shells to the Pakistan government and was also most successful in the manufacturing of counterfeit German dress daggers. Too talkative, Atwood eventually had a sudden, and fatal, “seizure” while lunching with CIA associates.

William Corson: A Marine Corps Colonel and President Carter’s representative to the CIA. A friend of Crowley and Kimmel, Corson was an intelligent man whose main failing was a frantic desire to be seen as an important person. This led to his making fictional or highly exaggerated claims.

John Costello: A British historian who was popular with revisionist circles. Died of AIDS on a trans-Atlantic flight to the United States.

James Critchfield: Former U.S. Army Colonel who worked for the CIA and organizaed the Cehlen Org. at Pullach, Germany. This organization was filled to the Plimsoll line with former Gestapo and SD personnel, many of whom were wanted for various purported crimes. He hired Heinrich Müller in 1948 and went on to represent the CIA in the Persian Gulf.

Robert T. Crowley: Once the deputy director of Clandestine Operations and head of the group that interacted with corporate America. A former West Point football player who was one of the founders of the original CIA. Crowley was involved at a very high level with many of the machinations of the CIA.

Gregory Douglas: A retired newspaperman, onetime friend of Heinrich Müller and latterly, of Robert Crowley. Inherited stacks of files from the former (along with many interesting works of art acquired during the war and even more papers from Robert Crowley.) Lives comfortably in a nice house overlooking the Mediterranean.

Reinhard Gehlen: A retired German general who had once been in charge of the intelligence for the German high command on Russian military activities. Fired by Hitler for incompetence, he was therefore naturally hired by first, the U.S. Army and then, as his level of incompetence rose, with the CIA. His Nazi-stuffed organizaion eventually became the current German Bundes Nachrichten Dienst.

Thomas K. Kimmel, Jr: A grandson of Admiral Husband Kimmel, Naval commander at Pearl Harbor who was scapegoated after the Japanese attack. Kimmel was a senior FBI official who knew both Gregory Douglas and Robert Crowley and made a number of attempts to discourage Crowley from talking with Douglas. He was singularly unsuccessful. Kimmel subsequently retired, lives in Florida, and works for the CIA as an “advisor.”

Willi Krichbaum: A Senior Colonel (Oberführer) in the SS, head of the wartime Secret Field Police of the German Army and Heinrich Müller’s standing deputy in the Gestapo. After the war, Krichbaum went to work for the Critchfield organization and was their chief recruiter and hired many of his former SS friends. Krichbaum put Critchfield in touch with Müller in 1948.

Heinrich Müller: A former military pilot in the Bavarian Army in WWI, Müller  became a political police officer in Munich and was later made the head of the Secret State Police or Gestapo. After the war, Müller escaped to Switzerland where he worked for Swiss intelligence as a specialist on Communist espionage and was hired by James Critchfield, head of the Gehlen Organization, in 1948. Müller subsequently was moved to Washington where he worked for the CIA until he retired.

Joseph Trento: A writer on intelligence subjects, Trento and his wife “assisted” both Crowley and Corson in writing a book on the Russian KGB. Trento believed that he would inherit all of Crowley’s extensive files but after Crowley’s death, he discovered that the files had been gutted and the most important, and sensitive, ones given to Gregory Douglas. Trento was not happy about this. Neither were his employers.

Frank Wisner: A Founding Father of the CIA who promised much to the Hungarian and then failed them. First, a raging lunatic who was removed from Langley, screaming, in a strait jacket and later, blowing off the top of his head with a shotgun.

Robert Wolfe: A retired librarian from the National Archives who worked closely with the CIA on covering up embarrassing historical material in the files of the Archives. A strong supporter of holocaust writers specializing in creative writing.