Are We Conjuring The Foundation For Terror?

Is There An Ulterior Motive Behind The Senseless Killing Of Civilians?


The War On Terror, Or The War For Terror?
The U.S. Is Inciting More Terror Than It Stops. This Makes No Sense, Unless...
NewsFocus Op/Ed, by Tim Watts - 110811

With every military campaign, we have been led to believe there is always an objective, but ever since the advent of the Wolfowitz / Bush Doctrine of unprovoked warfare, it would seem that objective has become quite questionable for many Americans, and the international community as a whole.

First we were told we had to attack Afghanistan to kill the Taliban for not turning over Osama bin Laden, even though they did offer to turn him over to Bush.

Then we invaded Iraq with Operation Iraqi Freedom. Bush and Cheney both said that Saddam had ties to 9/11, so we had to ransack the country, even though Bush later admitted that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.

And now we've attacked our third country since 9/11 with the unprovoked invasion of Libya and the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi, under U.S. charges that he was a brutal tyrant, even though Gaddafi was set to be awarded a human rights award from the United Nations. Libya enjoyed the highest standard of living in all of Africa, even better than oil rich countries such as Saudi Arabia, Brazil and Russia. Some tyrant. He sure had the UN fooled. Funny how he became a tyrant once he refused to no longer accept fiat money in the form of U.S. Federal Reserve notes. This was the same mistake that Saddam Hussein made.

Wow. Three unprovoked invasions of innocent countries since 9/11. Looks like the U.S. takes that Wolfowitz / Bush Doctrine of unprovoked warfare to heart.

What ever happened to the "three strikes and you're out" law?

With 700 bases in over 130 countries around the world, it's hard to think we are "just helping out," especially when we now consider offensive force to be our prerogative.

Another country we've bombarded is Pakistan. We've been bombing them senseless with drone strikes since the Bush administration. We've killed thousands of innocent civilians, including women and children. This brutality has increased under the Obama administration.

Independent research has revealed that the number of US drone strikes in Pakistan has risen from one in 2004, to one every four days. Some say it is much higher, but the figures are hard to get because the U.S. won't detail every strike.

Officials in the U.S. continue to falsely claim that drone strikes are ‘the most accurate weapon in history’. Somehow I think thousands of dead Pakistanis would dispute that contention, if we hadn't murdered them first. Some claim over 168 children have been killed, but again, others say the number is much higher.

So when did we declare war on Pakistan? Osama and the CIA led Al Qaeda forces were the original reasons we supposedly started bombing Pakistan, but Osama is long dead, certain enough after two separate death admissions in both 2001 and 2011.

We supposedly went in to Pakistan to get Osama and also Al Qaeda, very interesting since both are long known assets of the CIA. If you doubt this, do some hard research, as others already have. Be forewarned first, the truth hurts and it isn't pretty.

Ask yourself this, how can we claim to be hunting Al Qaeda in Pakistan when they are working for U.S. interests in Libya? Al Qaeda fighting side by side with Libyan rebels and NATO forces? Hard to believe for some, but it's true.

How is it we still claim to be hunting the Taliban when we let them escape Afghanistan under Bush? Maybe that had something to do with Bush's first official Taliban meeting after stealing the presidency. Many suspected that the U.S. was actually funding the Taliban in Afghanistan. That's right, the U.S. was funding our alleged enemy.

So, if Osama is officially dead, twice over, and the CIA originated Al Qaeda is working with the US in Libya, and we've been funding the Taliban, what the heck are we doing blowing up wedding parties and civilian gatherings with gutless drone attacks?

I use the term gutless because we are killing at no risk to ourselves, using unmanned Predator and Reaper drone aircraft attacks. Not that I want U.S. soldiers in harms way, because no one wants that, but we kill civilians with no chance of being personally identified for war crimes, nor risk the threat of being shot back at.

To this reporter, the best way to honor and support our troops is to quit sending them into foreign lands to attack innocent countries for greedy banksters who are too scared to put on a uniform themselves.

One quick aside... more US soldiers die as a result of suicide now than they do in battle. Three years in a row this horrific figure has risen. We are asking our soldiers to commit unspeakable atrocities that they are having problems coping with, and it is clearly taking its toll. We dope them up with dangerous psychotropic SSRI drugs and then leave them to cope on their own. The drugs only exacerbate the horrors of war, along with a resulting fragile mental state, an unnecessary burden for our beloved service men and women.

I say support our troops by bringing them home to a normal way of life with their loved ones. Quit sending them into harm's way in the first place.

The drone attacks are a new faceless way to wage war. Fighting from a distance from the end of a joystick disenfranchises the operator from the horror of war. Most drones are remote controlled from Langely, Virginia, the home of the CIA. This remote killing makes the act seem like just another level from the best selling software games Call of Duty, or Warfare, only this is no X-Box or PlayStation video game. Real people die. Worse yet, innocent civilians are murdered, including women, children, and the elderly.

All the way around, no matter how you look at it, it just seems very morally wrong.

So who is the real terrorist?

After attacking and destroying three innocent countries with unprovoked wars, it is a legitimate question to ask.

Like the incredibly futile (non-existent) war on drugs, the war on terrorism can be viewed as an unwinnable war, which is why it is so popular with neo-cons and the military industrial war machine. It was purposefully set up this way, open-ended, for maximum profit.

When you think about it, the "war on terror" is a vague, intellectually deficient term. They may as well have called it the war on "bad," or my favorite moronic Bushism, a war on "evil-doers." Barring the second coming of Christ, how is anyone going to end a war on bad people, or terror?

Again, it was set up this way to be a never ending war for profit. Most Americans are simply too shamefully stupid to realize the absurdity of the phrase "war on terror."

The unmistakable horror of war in the last 100 years is the rise in civilian casualties.

  • In WW I, the civilian casualty rate was roughly 40%.
  • In WW II, the civilian casualty rate rose to over 60%.
  • Today, the civilian casualty rate is a staggering 90%.

The end result of all this is clearly anti-American sentiment. Even national security officials, including those involved in the drone program, are warning that the drone strikes are increasing anti-Americanism and boosting recruitment of rebels wanting to defend their homelands and fight back against the unwarranted murders of their countryman and innocent civilians.

Note: we call these rebels, who rightfully try to defend themselves and fight back against the senseless civilian slaughter of their people, "terrorists."

A commanding three-fourths majority of Pakistani residents oppose the U.S. drone attacks. Over half of those surveyed believe the unmanned aerial drone attacks kill mostly innocent civilians. Even more illuminating, sixty-percent believe that suicide bombings against the U.S. military are, more often than not, quite justified.

According to Sify News of India, "The yearly report of Conflict Monitoring Centre (CMC) has termed the CIA drone strikes as an 'assassination campaign turning out to be a revenge campaign."

The CMC report also accuses the US and Pakistan of purposefully trying to hide civilian deaths. The report alleges that the US and their bought-off Pakistani officials lack any proper mechanism to assess the toll of civilian deaths. The CMC report also accuses them of blatantly overlooking civilian causalities.

ANI reported, "Civilian casualties were deliberately overlooked to avert the public reaction"

Pakistan officials claim that 140 civilians are killed for every one alleged terrorist. The US Brookings Institute significantly tries to water that number down, saying that ten civilians are killed for every militant.

I don't know about you, but even the latter figure is an unacceptable loss of innocent human life. A ten to one ratio is appalling. If the Pakistanis are correct, we are worse than Nazis.

Add it up any way you like, the innocent civilian murder rate is criminal and barbaric.

Pakistan’s government reported that US aerial drones killed just civilians in 39 out of 44 attacks in 2009 alone. That year, over 700 innocent civilians were killed, as estimated by the Pakistani press. In 2010, the death toll soared to over 950 innocent civilians.

What is most troubling is that Pakistan has continually denounced the US attacks, yet we continue on, under our own pious, bully authority.

So under what legal authority are we doing this? If the official Pakistani government and its people are calling for the US to stop, why in God's name are we attacking a country that is alleged to be an ally?

To coin an old phrase, with friends like the US, who needs enemies?

In case you miss the obvious in this, when the Pakistan government and its people are begging you to stop bombing their country and killing innocent civilians, this makes the US guilty of war crimes. Period. There can be no argument to the contrary.

If Pakistan were doing this to us in our country, what would Americans think?

Despite numerous civilian protests throughout Pakistan, including thousands in Karachi, the Pentagon says that it will double its drone strikes in the next few years.

Presidential hopeful Ron Paul has stated, For everyone you kill, you probably create ten new people who hate our guts and would like to do us harm."

No pun intended, but that's probably a conservative estimate.

This gets me to the long-winded point of this piece... why are we doing this?

For what possible reason are we killing innocent men, women and children, including the elderly? The question begs to be asked. The senseless slaughter of innocent civilians creates more adversaries than we can possibly deter. Just do the math.

In light of the previous facts already pointed out above regarding a dead Osama, a US allied Al Qaeda, and a US funded Taliban insurgency, why are we doing this?

What is our real purpose? What objective are we meeting?

If you learn one thing from this piece it is the net effect of our actions... we are creating anti-American hatred, while seemingly inviting retaliation from a another country, one which possesses nuclear weapons.

Knowing that the powers that be, the Rothschild-Rockefeller banking cartel, are a devious lot with no moral regard for anyone but themselves, I see a most unsettling possibility in all of this, inviting an attack on American soil. If not that, then laying the foundation for another false flag event that can be blamed on Pakistani "terrorists."

With 81% of Americans thinking that the government is hiding something from us regarding 9/11, and with the Occupy protests spreading across the country to end the crooked Federal Reserve cabal, coupled with a surging Ron Paul candidacy to take back our government, it's certainly not out of the realm of deviousness for these rat-bastards to resort to any diabolical plan to save their own slimy reptilian skins.

The US corporate media puppets are already setting up this possible scenario, even though Pakistan says such reports of possible American plans to secure the country’s nuclear arsenal is "pure fiction." The US media is suggesting the plan in the event of an extremist threat, saying "no one should underestimate its (Pakistan's) capability to defend its national interests." 

Well at least they got one thing right, that Pakistan would simply be "defending" itself. It would not be an offensive attack, such as those waged by the US on Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Pakistan.

A Pakistani Foreign Office Spokesperson said the article “The Ally From Hell” was “baseless and motivated”.

“The surfacing of such campaigns is not something new. It is orchestrated by quarters that are inimical to Pakistan,” the statement said.

So the wheels are turning and the trial balloons are being floated in the US media about potential foreign blowback.

One could very successfully proffer the argument that we are easily creating more "terrorists" than we are subduing or killing, and it appears to be by calculated design.

It is a scary thought to think about pissing off a country with nuclear weapons. It is an even scarier thought to think this might be orchestrated on purpose, to set us up for another false flag attack.

One thing appears to be painfully clear, the result of our actions is not justified. The end is certainly not justifying the means, unless of course, perhaps, our intent is indeed something wholly different.

Rational, compassionate, sentient human beings have to wonder, are we fighting terrorism, or merely fomenting more?

You can be certain that the powers that be do have a goal in mind. They're just not sharing it with us.

Beware the terrorist that comes from the inside. They are the most insidious of all.

Read also:

The Attack On Libya Is Not As You've Been Told

More reading:

More drone info

Anger of Pakistan drone victims

CIA Drones Kill Large Groups Without Knowing Who They Are

Pakistan: unlawful US drone war kills 140 innocent civilians for 1 alleged terrorist

US denial of civilian deaths in drone attacks dismissed as untrue

Pakistan orders US drones out of base

Report slams Pakistan drone attacks

In Pakistan, Drones Kill Our Innocent Allies

Pakistani Civilian Victims Vent Anger Over U.S. Drones

US drone strikes in Pakistan claiming many civilian victims

US Killed 700 Civilians in Pakistan Drone Strikes in 2009

US drones killed 957 Pakistani civilians in 2010: Report

US drones killed 2,043 people, mostly civilians, in Pakistan

US drone strike victims in Pakistan plan legal action

CIA Drones Kill Civilians in Pakistan

Pakistan holds exhibit of drone attacks

Pakistan In Pictures

About The Author:
Tim Watts is a veteran San Francisco broadcaster with 25 years experience in the industry as an on-air talent, Program Director, and consultant. He is the creator and sole author of the websites, and He has been writing about U.S. corruption over the last decade, while also investigating 9/11 from the moment that the first tower fell. He has documented his 9/11 research on a website called A September Coup

Return to