Is America the Worlds Largest Sponsor of Terrorism?
by George Washington
Admit that the U.S. Is a Huge Sponsor of Terrorism
of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan Lt. General
William Odom noted:
United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists
and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today’s war
on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical
to the rest of the world.
Odom also said:
By any measure
the US has long used terrorism. In 78-79 the Senate was trying
to pass a law against international terrorism in every version
they produced, the lawyers said the US would be in violation.
States has long been an exporter of terrorism, according
to a secret CIA analysis released Wednesday by the Web site WikiLeaks.
The head and
special agent in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles office
said that most terror attacks are committed by our CIA and FBI.
Herman observed that terror was concentrated in the U.S. sphere
of influence in the Third World, and documented terror carried
out by U.S. client states in Latin America. They observed that
of ten Latin American countries that had death squads, all
were U.S. client states.
that the global rise in state terror was a result of U.S.
a book edited by Alexander L. George [the Graham H. Stuart Professor
of Political Science Emeritus at Stanford University] also argued
that other Western powers sponsored terror in Third World countries.
It concluded that the U.S. and its allies were the main
supporters of terrorism throughout the world.
Some in the
American military have intentionally tried to "out-terrorize
Ethan McCord and Josh Stieber] say they saw their mission as a
plan to out-terrorize the terrorists, in order to make the general
populace more afraid of the Americans than they were of insurgent
In the interview
with [Scott] Horton, Horton pressed Stieber:
veteran of yours from the same battalion has said that you guys
had a standard operating procedure, SOP, that said and I guess
this is a reaction to some EFP attacks on yalls Humvees and
stuff that killed some guys that from now on if a roadside
bomb goes off, IED goes off, everyone who survives the attack
get out and fire in all directions at anybody who happens to
that this was actually an order from above. Is that
correct? Can you, you know, verify that?
it was an order that came from Kauzlarich himself, and it had
the philosophy that, you know, as Finkel does describe in the
book, that we were under pretty constant threat, and what he
leaves out is the response to that threat. But the philosophy
was that if each time one of these roadside bombs went off where
you dont know who set it
the way we were told to respond
was to open fire on anyone in the area, with the philosophy
that that would intimidate them, to be proactive in stopping
people from making these bombs
The use of
violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political
So McCord and
Stieber are correct: this constitutes terrorism by American forces
The U.S. has
been supporting Al Qaeda and other terrorists in Afghanistan,
Bosnia, Libya, Syria and Iran.
(The U.S. has
also directly inserted itself into a sectarian war between the two
main Islamic sects, backing the Sunnis and attacking the Shiites.
Because Saudi Arabia is the seat of the most radical sect of Islam
Wahhabism the U.S. unquestioning support of the Saudis is indirectly
the rest of the article
Washington blogs at Washington's
© 2012 Washington's