Order the autumn edition here

The word that kills

MOUTH BASKET: Abuse of power, war of aggression and mass murder are today carried out without anyone lifting a finger, since all criticism is dismissed as "conspiracy theory".

(PS. This article is machine-translated from Norwegian)

Ola Tunander
Tunander is Professor Emeritus of PRIO. See also wikipedia, hos PRIO: , as well as a bibliography on Waterstone

Wars of aggression must always be legitimized in the mass media and in the UN with arguments such as genocide or weapons of mass destruction. When critics today say that the aforementioned arguments are used as a pretext to go to war for regime change, these critics are referred to as "conspiracy theorists". After that, they become quiet. Critics dare not say anything more, because the word "conspiracy theorist" has been given about the same status as the word "Jew" had in the 30s. The word has become a weapon used by the elites of American, British and other countries to kill an incipient resistance to war.

In recent decades, there have been many claims in the mass media about why the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria have been legitimate and necessary. Virtually all newspapers and television channels – The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN and the BBC – claimed in 2003 that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and in 2011 that Muammar al-Gaddafi would attack the city of Benghazi with genocide as a result. Now we know that this was based on "fake news". Responsible officials and new documents have confirmed that what was said in the media was a lie. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and there was no threat to Benghazi, but there were Americans and Britons, and Iraqi and Libyan opposition figures who had produced false documents to legitimize a war. We now know about who produced these documents – including the fake signatures to bind Saddam Hussein to an alleged purchase of uranium from Niger, and we know from the revelation of Hillary Clinton's emails that the attack on Libya was not about protecting civilians . We also know that the lies had catastrophic consequences, and that no one was punished for this.

Essentially all significant security policy activities secret – and it is kept secret for decades. The great powers have enormous intelligence services, and their activities are invisible. Vice President Harry Truman, for example, was not informed of the US nuclear weapons program (with more than 100 employees) before taking over as president in April 000. Central state secrets are often known only to a few, and they can manipulate others' views and veto democratically made decisions. This is what we now call "The Deep State", a term I used already in 1945-2004, and which later through a colleague, Peter Dale Scott, came to spread in the United States. President Donald Trump began to use the term, albeit with a slightly different meaning. It is the same type of phenomenon that exists in many countries.

When the media in the 80s talked about «Russian submarines in Swedish waters», it turned out that these were US and UK operations to test Swedish preparedness. Someone in "The Deep State" in Sweden knew this, but the Swedish people and the government were brought to light. US Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger confirmed these operations in 2000, and his Navy Secretary John Lehman told me that the decision was taken by a "deception committee" headed by CIA commander William Casey. When a friend of mine asked one of President Ronald Reagan's closest, Thomas Reed, about the "deception operations," Reed replied: "Yes, the CIA operates with 'deception'. That's what they do. " They are busy manipulating the media and fooling foreigners, not least Allied governments. And with the US $ 80 billion per year intelligence budget, one can do pretty much. One can fool the government and the population around.

One must always have a reason to start a war. Then false attacks and false claims are necessary.

When I told what Weinberger, Lehman and Reed had said in interviews on Swedish, German and French television after the year 2000, I was called a "conspiracy theorist". Even when a Swedish foreign minister and a journalist said that there was no support for the claim of Russian activity in Swedish waters, they were called "conspiracy theorists". The British official David Kelly, who was aware that there were hardly any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, took up the matter with a BBC journalist in the spring of 2003 and had to testify before the Foreign Affairs Committee. Three days later he was found dead in the woods. The person who questioned this incident was called a "conspiracy theorist".

And while in Norway before the Iraq war in 2003 one could still criticize the war, it was almost impossible to do the same prior to the Libyan war in 2011. While the Storting was divided when it came to the Iraq war, the support for the war was against Libya total. The critic was slandered and described as a "conspiracy theorist".

The Vietnam War of 1964 was credited with a North Vietnamese attack on the US destroyer USS "Maddox". My friend and former colleague Robert Bathurst was on duty at the Pentagon that night. He called and woke the US Navy commander, and the war became a fact. But it was not until the 90s that it became clear to Robert that no attack had ever taken place. He showed me an article in the Naval Intelligence Professionals Quarterly from Admiral James Stockdale, who flew as a young pilot over the USS "Maddox": "It was only US fire and black water." It also emerged that the United States had used small Norwegian speedboats (MTBs), with partially Norwegian crews, to bomb the North Vietnamese coast in an attempt to trick the Vietnamese into attacking the USS "Maddox" – which would legitimize a US attack and full war. Some of these Norwegians continued in Norwegian intelligence. Although Robert had been chief of the US Navy's intelligence service for Europe in the 70s, it was not until 30 years later that he was informed of what had been going on.

In 1962, two years before the alleged attack in Vietnam, the US military leadership wanted a war against Cuba and proposed to President John F. Kennedy a campaign ("Operation Northwoods") with bomb blasts in American cities. The blame for the terrorist attacks in Washington (DC) and Miami was to be placed on Cuban agents, and false documents were to be produced to confirm the "Cuban attacks". Other proposals were to sink a US ship and shoot down a US plane and blame Cuba for legitimizing a war against the island state. False funerals of "dead from the plane" were believed to strengthen anti-Cuban public opinion.

President Kennedy. refused, however, to accept the military leadership's proposal. The Chief of Defense, General Lyman Lemnitzer, was relocated and became Commander-in-Chief of NATO forces in Europe, where he continued to carry out terrorist attacks and bombings while blaming the political left. The document for "Operation Northwoods", signed by Lemnitzer, was stamped "Top Secret, Special Handling, Noforn" (No foreign nationals). The document was downgraded 40 years later, and it is only now that we know a little more about this. The document well reflects the thinking in the United States.

One must always have a reason for å start a war. Then there are false documents, false attacks and false allegations necessary. Such was the case in Vietnam, Afghanistan, the former Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya.

A widely used false document that is highlighted by those who condemn "conspiracy theories", is the so-called Zion's protocols appear. The protocols were said to show a Jewish conspiracy with an alleged plan for a Jewish world domination. The document was used by the Russian secret police, Okhrana, and later also by the Nazis in their fight against the Jews. But producing such false documents and referring to attacks that have never occurred – or attacks on one's own or allies' land – carried out by one's own forces is exactly what US and British intelligence have been doing for decades. And anyone who questions these documents or events is effectively branded a "conspiracy theorist." In this way, the word "conspiracy theory" has been given a reverse meaning. We already live in Orwell's 1984.

- self-advertisement -

Recent Comments:

Siste artikler