Advertisement
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up,
it unlocks many cool features!
- [MUSIC]
- ROCKWELL: Well, good morning.
- This is the Lew Rockwell Show,
- and it’s great to have as our guest this morning Mrs. Sibel Edmonds.
- You know, we have a lot of great people on this show.
- We have just a lot of tremendous intellectuals for freedom
- and people exposing the CIA and other government activities,
- but Sibel’s a heroine as well as being an important intellectual figure.
- She was a translator for the FBI.
- She’s fluent, of course, in English and Turkish and Farsi and Azerbaijani.
- And she got punished for telling the truth within the FBI.
- They silenced her for quite a long time.
- But she wouldn’t allow herself to be silenced.
- She told the truth about what she discovered about various aspects of 9/11,
- and it’s in her wonderful memoir, Classified Woman.
- And we’re, of course, going to link to that.
- We’re going to link to all her sites.
- She’s director of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition.
- We’ll link to her site, Boiling Frogs,
- and to her YouTube channel, her Facebook page, Twitter and everything else.
- But, Sibel, today I wanted to talk to you
- — you had some very interesting things to say
- about the Boston bombing,
- the Chechnyan connection,
- and the U.S. role in promoting terrorism,
- which then it pretends to fight.
- So talk to us about that.
- EDMONDS: Sure, Lew.
- In fact, about a few days after the Boston terror attack,
- we put out specific video reports
- and interviews and analyses pointing out
- that people keep talking about the FBI angle
- and a lot of semantics in what took place,
- and that nobody was talking about the CIA angle.
- And in our presentation,
- we brought up everything we have been covering
- both in the last four years to Boiling Frogs Post,
- but also during all my interviews in the past 10 years on state secrets privilege
- and the information that the government, the U.S. government
- tried to quash, and successfully,
- within the Congress and the federal courts.
- And of course, the mainstream media
- was the angle that dealt with Caucasus and Central Asia.
- If people were to conduct the research
- on all my previous articles and interviews,
- including the interview you and I did on my book
- about almost a year ago, I believe –
- ROCKWELL: Yes. Yes.
- EDMONDS: We talked about,
- and I was emphasizing the importance
- of Central Asia and Caucasus in my case
- and how the gag orders and the state secrets privilege,
- they were designed to basically quash that part of my case,
- what I blew the whistle on,
- which never saw the light of day
- because I talked about the CIA/NATO covert operations
- in Central Asia/Caucasus,
- both directly but also via our ally and NATO partner, Turkey.
- This was the extension of this operation known as Operation Gladio.
- A lot of people are familiar with Operation Gladio
- as the NATO/U.S. covert false-flag operations around the world
- during the Soviet Union era, during the Communism.
- You know, basically we went all over Europe, Eastern Europe,
- in Central and South America,
- and we created terror attacks
- and basically blamed that on the Communists and on the Soviet Union.
- Now, people — and the documents surfaced,
- and this was after the fall of the Soviet Union.
- There were some trials and some parliamentary hearings in Italy
- because Italy, of course, also was and is a NATO ally,
- and they played a role, not the major role,
- in these false terror attacks under Operation Gladio.
- And based on the declassified documents,
- it’s already a confirmed
- — it’s not a conspiracy theory.
- It’s not one of those unconfirmed reports.
- It is an operation that,
- after the fall of the Soviet Union,
- became known through all these documents
- that, yes, in fact, for several decades,
- we carried out
- — and especially in the 1980s, as this was the height of it,
- late ’70s until mid ’80s —
- these false terror attacks under Operation Gladio
- under the U.S. and NATO.
- Now, the false belief is that that operation stopped in 1990, 1991,
- and that the U.S. and NATO,
- they shut down the older cells
- that they had placed in various countries, including Italy,
- and because the Soviet regime fell and the Communism was gone.
- And that is not the case.
- And that has to do with my case, with my whistleblowing
- because one of the most important partners
- during the initial phases of Operation Gladio
- was Turkey; again, a NATO member.
- And of course, you can see the importance
- of Turkey strategically where it’s located.
- And if you look at the map and look at the
- — you know, Turkey’s neighbors,
- sharing borders with countries like Georgia
- and also with the Balkans.
- The one cell that they did not shut down
- — and this was U.S. and NATO —
- was the Turkish cell, the Turkish arm of Operation Gladio.
- And the reason for that was, again,
- Turkey’s position in the region
- and also Turkey’s characteristics,
- because Turkish people, they speak Turkish, the Turkish language.
- And this is the language spoken all over Central Asia and Caucasus,
- when you’re talking about Chechnya, et cetera.
- Turkey is a Muslim nation.
- Well, this region, Central Asia/Caucasus, they are Muslim.
- Also, Turkish people share the same heritage.
- They are the Turkic race, Turkic people
- with, again, the people of this region,
- Central Asia and Caucasus.
- They are known as Turkic-heritage people.
- So the reason the United States, NATO, CIA
- did not shut down the Operation Gladio cell in Turkey
- was they actually intensified operations
- through Turkey for this region.
- As we discussed during our last interview a year ago, Lew,
- if you look at this region,
- you’re looking at the future of the energy resources.
- You’re looking at this region, including Azerbaijan, on the Caspian Sea,
- the vast reserves of natural gas, oil and minerals.
- And as I have emphasized during our interview last time
- — and maybe you would provide a link for people when you post this interview –
- ROCKWELL: I sure will.
- EDMONDS: Thank you.
- That in the next 15, 20 years,
- the focus is going to be completely shifted;
- it’s just going to shift from the Middle East
- to Central Asia/Caucasus.
- You know that there’s limited reserve
- basically with Saudi Arabia, Iraq.
- What you’re going to be seeing,
- what we’re going to be seeing
- — and this is going to include the mainstream media at that point —
- is going to be Central Asia/Caucasus.
- So the CIA and NATO, U.S.,
- they did not shut down this Gladio Operation,
- the Turkish cell,
- and, in fact, they intensified.
- And the goal was
- — and this is what the operation was geared towards —
- was to use both Turkey
- with the Turkish language and Islam,
- and penetrate these states,
- both the former bloc,
- former states like Azerbaijan and Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan,
- but also the Caucasus region
- — and you’re looking at Abkhazia,
- you’re looking at Chechnya, you’re looking at Dagestan —
- and promote radical Islamism and also the Turkic nationalism.
- Later, they dumped the Turkic nationalism angle
- because it did not really work.
- So the focus by 1995, 1996, was placed on radicalization
- and the recruitment of these people through Islam,
- and through various Turkish imams,
- and sponsoring the building of mosques and madrassas
- in Central Asia and Caucasus.
- And not only that, training and arming these radical Islamists that we were
- — United States and CIA and NATO through Turkey in this region.
- So one of the factions in this region that we recruited
- and started arming and training and orchestrating attacks through
- was the Chechnya group,
- and as you see, with Russia.
- Now, the FBI files,
- the major investigation that I was translating for,
- which included both real-time information
- — I was hired after 9/11 —
- but also the file itself started in 1996
- and continued all the way to February, 2002
- — was the U.S. angle of these operations.
- And that is not because the FBI
- had any territory or authority
- for what’s happening, taking place
- through U.S. actors in that region,
- but because of what was taking place in the U.S.
- with some of the Turks who were actually on the most-wanted list,
- on the Interpol list,
- to carry out these attacks.
- Because some of these people that we brought into the United States,
- because we also have a cell here
- — it was in Chicago and Washington, D.C.,
- with the Turkic actors and some of the leaders from these factions included,
- the people on the terrorists list,
- which were also on the FBI’s list.
- So by investigating what was happening in the U.S. with these actors,
- by default, these FBI files contained a lot of the information
- that dealt with our operations in that part of the region,
- because that’s exactly what those cells in the U.S.
- and these individuals were doing,
- together with their U.S. handlers.
- So if you look at some of the major Chechnyan terrorist attacks
- against Russia between 1996 and 2002,
- I can tell you with 100% confidence,
- because of what we have in the FBI,
- that these were actually directed and carried out
- and managed through our partner Turkey
- and through the CIA operatives against
- Russia.
- Again, to get those people on our side
- and to be able to have this penetration,
- these channels into the Russia territory.
- And this also
- — and I’m going to put a parenthesis here —
- includes the western part of China,
- this area that people refer to as Xinjiang area.
- Another name for Xinjiang area
- — and this is a small Muslim Turkish community within the Russia borders.
- And that’s not the Russian/Chinese border.
- And, again, you look at what has been taking place since 1996,
- you’re going to see a lot of Islamic terrorist attacks against China
- in that region, Xinjiang.
- And the other name for Xinjiang is Turkestan.
- Why? Because they have the same Turkish heritage.
- They speak the Turkish language and they are Muslims.
- Another name for it — some people know the region as Uyghurstan
- because they are also referred to as Hui Uyghurs.
- So this operation continued until February 2002,
- and I was fired in April 2002.
- And that was the main reason for the state secrets privilege.
- So after my termination
- and all the whistleblowing journey for the past 11 years,
- I’ve been talking about look at this region, Central Asia/Caucasus.
- And in this region, all the way until 9/11, three months past
- — after 9/11, we did work
- — we, the United States —
- with Bin Laden and Ayman Zawahiri, al Zawahiri, in the region,
- because we worked with other Islamic factions
- that we were recruiting and we were channeling to this region.
- And some of them were Pakistanis, Saudi individuals,
- people from Afghanistan
- in this arming and training of the factions
- in Central Asia and Caucasus.
- And of course, mainstream media never printed a single word of this.
- In fact, in some cases,
- the journalists with the mainstream media,
- I mean, they were ignorant.
- I mean, they wouldn’t even know.
- They couldn’t even point out the region on the map.
- If you were to open the map and say,
- “Show me where is Dagestan located, or Kyrgyzstan,”
- they would say,
- “What does it have to do?
- We are focused on the U.S. stuff
- and she is referring to Central Asia/Caucasus.”
- In other instances, it was completely intentional
- because the United States government,
- especially with the State Department,
- has been keeping this very tight closed lid
- on any information from that part of the world
- to be printed in the United States,
- being covered with the U.S. media.
- As we all know, we are supporting the dictators there.
- We are giving them billions of dollars,
- whether it’s in Azerbaijan
- or whether it’s in Kyrgyzstan.
- For example, with the Bakiyevs,
- the family, and the former prime minister
- — or the president in Kyrgyzstan, who is now in exile.
- Where? In the United Kingdom.
- That is just a little bit of background,
- why I’m familiar with this case.
- And when the Boston terror attack took place
- and the word started coming out, for the first time,
- the Americans were really hearing about Chechnya and Dagestan.
- And the people there,
- they were always portrayed in the U.S. media,
- until this Boston terror attack,
- as the “freedom fighters” against Russians,
- that the Russians were the ones,
- the bad guys who were repressing them.
- They wanted to have their own nation,
- even though they are within Russian territory;
- they are within Russian borders.
- So that’s how we have been portraying these people
- — our media —
- up until this Boston terror attack.
- The Boston terror attack
- — suddenly, all of them
- — and this is the U.S. mainstream media —
- they discovered this region, Chechnya.
- And suddenly, Chechnya went
- — the Chechnyans —
- from “freedom fighters”
- to the radical Islamists
- to “terrorists,” the usual titles.
- And then the U.S. government started talking about the region,
- the Dagestan/Chechnyan region
- as one of the hottest al Qaeda and Islamic radical terrorism nests.
- So I invited people,
- I urged people to pause for a second
- and say let’s look at the geopolitical aspect of what took place,
- and why suddenly the mainstream media
- is taking their dictation from the State Department.
- They went, our allies and the people we were sympathizing with,
- the — just like Mujahadeen in the 1980s in Afghanistan,
- the same al Qaeda/Taliban people there,
- the radical Islamists in Afghanistan
- during the war with the Soviets,
- were our friends.
- And how did we portray them during the 1980s
- when we were arming them, training them
- against Russia, against the Soviets?
- They were the “freedom fighters.”
- They were incredible people.
- Then 9/11 takes place and, bam,
- those same people who worked for us, under us,
- our allies, the ones we portrayed for two decades as “freedom fighters,”
- overnight, with 9/11, the story switched
- and they became the radical Islamist terrorists;
- and, of course, the invasion of Afghanistan
- and all of the wars that we have been carrying out since 9/11.
- Well, thinking with this Boston terror event,
- within one day, suddenly,
- it became Chechnya and Dagestan and even Kyrgyzstan
- and being the hottest terror cells
- and the terror bed and Islamic radicals.
- And amazing. And you look at it,
- in the last two weeks now,
- everybody in the U.S.,
- they know the name Chechnya and Dagestan,
- and all they think right now is the hot terror cells,
- and these are the radical Islamist terrorists.
- So within the first two, three days,
- I came out and I said you’ve got to look at the parallels,
- you’ve got to look at the geopolitical aspects of it,
- and you must — and these people —
- we must look at the CIA connection
- because this carries more of the CIA M.O., modus operandi, than the FBI.
- And, of course, none of this was ever printed
- or mentioned within the U.S. media.
- So we started, at Boiling Frogs Post,
- analyzing and putting out videos,
- interviews and articles, a
- nd inviting people to take a look
- at this entire event from that angle
- and broaden the picture
- instead of getting lost in some of the semantics,
- which are very, very disturbing,
- the unanswered questions
- and what really took place during the event.
- And as part of that, we were emphasizing
- the role of the CIA in the region.
- Well, we started doing that,
- and within two days after we started
- putting out these interviews and analyses,
- low and behold, it became public
- that the suspects, the brothers,
- attended the CIA-linked Jamestown Foundation’s training
- and conferences in that part of the world.
- Jamestown Foundation — and this was leaked
- from the Georgian intelligence agencies.
- And again, this was not printed in the mainstream media.
- The documents surfaced.
- And if you look at some alternative outlets,
- you will see that it’s a slam-dunk documented case
- that they were active at Jamestown Foundation
- in that part of the world.
- And Jamestown Foundation is known to be connected
- — an extension of the CIA.
- ROCKWELL: It’s openly a CIA front, virtually.
- EDMONDS: Exactly.
- So again, you won’t find traces of this
- being pounded in the mainstream media because
- — Why?
- Because the State Department and the CIA,
- they are controlling the official narrative
- on what took place in Boston.
- Now, two days after analysis,
- this information came out.
- Then, after we put further analysis
- — and this was only about four days ago —
- other documents surfaced that are absolutely
- — I would call them explosive —
- and that is the fact that
- — you know the infamous uncle for the suspects?
- ROCKWELL: Yes. Of course, yes.
- EDMONDS: Well, the uncle was the first one who came out
- — because all the friends from the universities, for the suspects,
- they said they didn’t see any radicalism.
- They were driving with some wealthy Turkish students
- and businessmen in Boston
- in BMWs and Mercedes Benz.
- The older guy, the older brother
- was going to night clubs.
- He was drinking.
- So none of these fit a portrait of a radical Islamist guy.
- Well, who was the first one who came
- and actually said, yes, they were radical
- — and, in fact, ended up being their own biological uncle.
- And immediately this man, this uncle,
- became the U.S. media’s darling.
- If you go and look at all the footage archives,
- you will see CNN, NBC, CBS constantly,
- around the clock putting this guy,
- the uncle of the suspects,
- under the spotlight,
- and this guy saying how they were radicalized,
- how they were fanatic Muslims,
- how they were terrorists,
- how he had written them off as his nephews,
- and constant coverage of this man, right?
- Well, three days ago, four days ago,
- these documents surfaced.
- These are solid documents, OK, that this man,
- the uncle of these suspects,
- the terror suspects, the two brothers,
- he was married (sic) to one of the top CIA operatives in that region,
- Central Asia/Caucasus region.
- That CIA operative
- — he’s a despicable man —
- is Graham Fuller.
- Graham Fuller retired from the CIA about 10 or 15 years ago
- but he has still been working as a contractor with the CIA.
- Now, I mean, if people believe in coincidences,
- even those people right now would pause
- and say, first, they expose that the brothers
- were active in the Jamestown Foundation, CIA front.
- Then comes the fact that the uncle,
- who was the first person
- — and that would make it very legitimate
- — even their own uncle comes out
- and says these guys are radical Islamists, right?
- Well, that uncle happens to be the ex-son-in-law
- of one of the top CIA operatives in the region.
- Now, even people who believe in coincidences
- would pause and say, “There can’t be.
- There’s no way that you would have this kind of coincidence.”
- Well, even though the documents surfaced,
- even though we have the coverage,
- you will not see this being covered
- or played out in the U.S. mainstream media
- because the uncle is part of the official narrative.
- Now, as with Graham Fuller
- — this is very interesting, Lew,
- because about six, seven years ago,
- I released a list of about 15, 20 Americans,
- U.S. officials, both from elected
- — elected officials but also appointed individuals,
- and these individuals with their names
- appeared in other sites,
- but I just put their pictures.
- I said, well, the state secrets privilege
- puts a gag order and says I cannot talk
- about the FBI targets, OK,
- in terms of the U.S. persons, officials
- involved in the terror activities,
- including the stuff with bin Laden and 9/11.
- However, I’m just putting these pictures out
- and I’m putting a name,
- and I’m going to name it my “State Secrets Privilege Gallery.”
- Well, anybody who was familiar with my case,
- anybody who was following the case with all the gag orders,
- they knew immediately this was one way to put out there
- and for people to know who were the people involved in my case
- and why the state secrets privilege invocation.
- This was in 2007 — end of 2007, early 2008
- that the documents went out to people.
- If you look at that list, you will see Graham Fuller there, OK?
- Now, Graham Fuller’s name just came out
- and nobody in the U.S. has ever really heard of him,
- except for some of the books he’s written,
- talking about how actually moderate Islam
- can be very good in that part of the world, et cetera,
- which is his front, because he’s also active
- within the academia here in the United States.
- But nobody has really seen this guy’s significance.
- Now, I put out this name
- and people look and say,
- “Why would she put this guy from the CIA, Graham Fuller”?
- Well, guess what? Graham Fuller happens to be
- the ex-father-in-law of the uncle
- for the Boston terror attacks.
- After we put out this information,
- and some alternative sources,
- Graham Fuller went to the media and said,
- “Yes, he was married to my daughter"
- "and they got divorced,"
- "but to say that there is any link between these suspects and the CIA"
- "would be absolutely absurd.”
- Well, of course: that’s what he would say.
- Now, further documents surfaced yesterday
- showing that not only that,
- the uncle lived with him
- — and this is Graham Fuller —
- in Graham Fuller’s Maryland house
- for over one year,
- in Rockville, Maryland, OK?
- So it was not just a casual,
- “He was the son-in-law and then they got divorced.” No.
- Even after the divorce,
- this man lived at Graham Fuller’s address,
- in his house,
- and used Graham Fuller’s address
- as his official address in 1990, OK?
- Again, you won’t see this being mentioned
- at all within the mainstream media.
- So this is — I know I’ve been talking non-stop here,
- and I’m going to pause and let you ask questions.
- This is why the CIA angle and the importance of this,
- and this little bit of background and explanation,
- why you won’t be seeing this in the U.S. mainstream media.
- (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
- ROCKWELL: Sibel, hasn’t the U.S., for very many years,
- deliberately backed the most radical form of Islam
- and terrorist aspects, too?
- I mean, as you say, we could look at the Mujahadeen they organized
- and funded against the Russians.
- I would say even the hatred of Nasser,
- who was a secular dictator.
- They don’t like secular dictators.
- That’s why they’re trying to overthrow Assad right now.
- That’s why they overthrew Saddam Hussein
- and then overthrew Gadhafi.
- These are obviously not good guys
- but they want them — but they are seculars,
- and they want them replaced with Al Qaeda types,
- if I can use that phrase.
- Because it makes trouble, right?
- ”Divide et impera.”
- It’s the way that empires
- — it’s the sort of trouble empires like to make in order to run things, so —
- in cahoots with Saudi Arabia, too, of course.
- For a very long time, the Saudis
- have been very, very close.
- I mean, all of us remember the pictures
- of the Saudi prince and George W. Bush
- kissing each other and holding hands
- and hugging and so forth
- on Bush’s ranch in Texas when he made a visit.
- I mean, the Saudis are very, very close to the American power elite.
- And of course, Obama bowing to the Saudi prince and so forth.
- And I guess if somebody were giving me millions of dollars,
- I’d bow to them, too.
- So I guess that’s sort of — (laughing) — understandable.
- EDMONDS: Absolutely.
- ROCKWELL: But the U.S. backs this sort of terrorism
- and hates the secular, non-Islamic fundamentalist regimes
- and tries to toss them out.
- So what does that say about their actual dealings
- and their actual motives?
- EDMONDS: No, absolutely.
- First of all, this started even before the United States,
- with the British Empire, the United Kingdom.
- They always were known to
- — their modus operandi in their empire building --
- to use religion.
- This happened in Iran.
- This is even long before Mossadegh.
- It was the Brits who always utilized the fanaticism
- and the radical Islamism in countries,
- in nations
- for their own nation building
- and for their empire purposes.
- And this continues with the United States.
- Now, during the Cold War, it was against the Soviet Union.
- So the United States basically adopted the British Empire model.
- And if you look at a lot of the key figures and advisors
- in drafting out foreign policy during this era,
- you’re going to keep coming across very well known Brits.
- And that is very, very interesting.
- I mean, I know Israel has always,
- starting with Kissinger,
- their influence in
- — or actually direct control over our foreign policy,
- but you will see a lot of British/U.K.-based think tanks and fronts
- that actually guided and shaped our foreign policy
- because that’s where we took.
- This is what we modeled after.
- Basically, it was that,
- with Russia being Communists, the Soviet Union,
- what is the best way to protect our turf
- and get countries on our side.
- Well, then, you look at the Middle East, the region,
- you’re looking at Islam.
- Because one of the major preventers in, let’s say,
- for countries like Iran,
- countries like, of course, NATO-allied Turkey,
- and then you can just go through the whole region
- -- from actually turning and aligning themselves with the Soviet regime,
- with the Communism —
- was Islam.
- And you’re looking at 99% Muslim populations, OK?
- Who are they going to align themselves with?
- With the atheists, Communists,
- or are they going to be
- — even though it’s a Christian nation,
- is it going to be the United States?
- So that was our modus operandi;
- that was our tactic during the Cold War.
- Well, after the Cold War
- — people say, well, the Cold War ended.
- Well, to a certain degree, yes, it ended.
- But we still have this very intense competition
- over resources of the world, OK?
- And that is both geostrategically
- — my favorite journalist, Pepe Escobar,
- refers to it as “Pipeline-istan,”
- and that is all the region that the pipelines
- have to travel and go through
- to get to Europe and to the United States, et cetera,
- and also the nations that have the resources, OK?
- And if you look at the resources,
- you are looking at the Middle East, Iraq, Saudi Arabia.
- And of course, we talk about the one that hasn’t fallen.
- The last piece in dominoes to fall is Iran.
- But then, you’re also looking at all these Central Asia/Caucasus
- and, of course, the Balkans
- because of the pipeline and the pipeline angle of it.
- So the competitors being who?
- The competitor being, A, Russia;
- competitor being, B, China, OK?
- And even though the Cold War ended
- and even though the U.S. media really doesn’t cover it,
- there has been this intense competition over the resources,
- especially in Central Asia and Caucasus.
- The Chinese modus operandi has been we go there,
- we make these business deals with these guys,
- whether it is in Kyrgyzstan or if it’s Turkmenistan,
- to basically have 10, 15, 20 years of control over their natural gas
- and have a pipeline,
- and we basically finance it,
- and have a pipeline for this natural gas to be built
- that goes from either Kyrgyzstan or Turkmenistan or any of the “stans,”
- all the way to Russia.
- Because their need for energy has really tremendously increased.
- They depend — they need — their survival depends on that energy,
- and that is natural gas and oil
- and, of course, minerals.
- And of course, these pipelines have to travel through the region
- and go through the Xinjiang area to reach China.
- And we talked about the importance of Xinjiang.
- That section, Xinjiang, is a small Muslim Turkish minority over there, OK?
- So that has been the Chinese modus operandi.
- With the U.S., we don’t do that.
- We like to do this cowboy style.
- It’s not only business deals.
- We say not only do we want the business deal,
- we want to put our base, military base in your country.
- What you’re looking at, Manas Air Base, Kyrgyzstan.
- You’re looking at Azerbaijan
- that is becoming a NATO member in the next couple of years.
- They have been under NATO training.
- And now they have fulfilled all their requirements,
- so now they’re going to be officially a NATO member.
- Georgia is in line to become a NATO member,
- another hot issue between Russia and the United States.
- So we say we’re going to put a military base, OK?
- And we want to put our pocket guys there,
- whether it’s Bakiyev, the tool of revolutions
- that would be brought about in that region,
- and we give them money.
- We basically protect their turf as dictators.
- We put our military base.
- But it’s not only business deals to us, the United States.
- We are not doing only business deals.
- We want militarily to take over.
- We want to have our regime to be installed there,
- which is a different style than China, OK?
- So that has been going on.
- The Chinese trying to go and making their own business deals,
- with us trying to go and grab them and make them NATO members,
- put our military bases there.
- Then on the other hand, we have Russia.
- Now, Russia is a major player
- in both supplying everywhere, including Europe,
- with also oil and natural gas
- and their pipeline interests in the region.
- And you’re also looking at their territory.
- I mean, you’re looking at these regions —
- I just mentioned Azerbaijan and Georgia.
- OK, again, I encourage people
- to open up the map and look at it.
- Azerbaijan, a NATO member basically already,
- and Georgia is in line, OK?
- We had that five-day war between Georgia and Russia in 2008,
- and still the area is very volatile
- because Russia is not stupid.
- They know what we are doing and they don’t like it.
- And then you look at the new fashionable region that we’re talking about
- with al Qaeda and terror bed, Dagestan and Chechnya.
- You would see that Dagestan and Chechnya
- lie right at the border of Russia, Georgia and Azerbaijan,
- right attached to that region.
- So this is why not only that we are taking over Georgia and Azerbaijan
- through our military bases and NATO training,
- but now — and not only now but for the last two decades,
- we’ve been trying to put our foothold in that Dagestan/Chechnya region.
- What better foothold than what we are doing,
- and that is taking the radical Islamists there in Chechnya,
- the minorities there, and in Dagestan,
- train them, arm them and say,
- go and create terror attacks in Russia,
- and get Russia bogged down with this radical Islamic terror internally,
- but also have them as a buffer zone in our territory.
- And I call it “our territory”
- because Georgia and Azerbaijan have already become our territory.
- And this is the buffer zone.
- This is exactly — it’s within Russia borders
- but it’s attached to the Georgia and Azerbaijan region.
- So the Cold War ended but the Cold War did not end.
- And, again, this is something that most Americans are not aware of.
- And, again, I will go back to Operation Gladio, Phase 2,
- and that is: target this region,
- which is Central Asia and Caucasus,
- radicalize, arm, train and create terrorists,
- and actually orchestrate terror events in that region.
- Now, within that light and under that angle,
- now we should look at the Boston terror
- and say, what are the ultimate — or what could be —
- and that will better, because we’re still talking about hypotheses.
- So much information has not been released.
- And everyday, the story evolves
- both in terms of what took place in Boston two weeks ago
- but also what other geopolitical developments we are witnessing
- since the attack, the terror attack in Boston.
- We have to look at those simultaneously
- and then we can have educated guesses,
- predictions and hypotheses on what could be major objectives
- in having this pretty much scripted event in Boston.
- ROCKWELL: You know, just to back up for just a second
- and your point about China and oil,
- no coincidence that in Libya
- there were 80,000 Chinese oil workers
- and — they signed all kinds of — China had signed all kinds of contracts
- to develop Libyan oil.
- And of course, the minute that Gadhafi was overthrown a
- nd the U.S.-installed so-called rebels came into power,
- they immediately abrogated all of these contracts
- and ordered the Chinese out of the country.
- EDMONDS: Exactly.
- And that’s an excellent example to look at the objectives,
- talking about Gadhafi, dictator,
- and our involvement and promoting democracy.
- And of course, we see what’s happening in Libya.
- But what you just mentioned,
- that is the real reason of what took place in Libya.
- And, again, you won’t see that within the mainstream media.
- And the same thing with what now we are witnessing,
- the recent developments with Syria.
- And the predictions that I put out there
- is based on what has been happening in the region,
- especially in the past couple of years,
- the CIA’s role in the Boston terror,
- and what could be possibly the consequences,
- possible outcomes of what took place.
- Well, of course, one of the main issues we should right away look at
- would be Syria, OK?
- We went there and, in a few months,
- we basically took over Libya,
- as you just mentioned.
- Now, with Syria, the whole thing has been dragging.
- It’s been going now for a year and a half, two years.
- It’s just been dragging. Why?
- Because Russia has been the biggest obstacle,
- the roadblock for us to go and invade, take over,
- just as we did with Libya.
- Because, with Libya, we didn’t have that obstacle.
- With Syria, Russia has been stepping in and saying no.
- So what would be a possible implication
- for that particular issue,
- which I will explain,
- and then maybe an educated hypothesis
- of the likely result of this.
- The other issue, of course,
- is what we are doing in the region
- with Georgia and Azerbaijan.
- And another hot issue, of course, is Iran.
- Now, the hypothesis that we put in our analysis out there
- — and we supported it with, again, all of the geopolitical developments
- immediately before and after the Boston terror attack
- — and that is —
- this happens a lot
- the dirty international politics.
- And even with our enemies or with our competitors,
- we make deals, OK?
- The deals are always made behind the scenes.
- Most of the time, people never find out about these deals.
- Because when you look at it at the surface,
- it looks like, wow, Russia, it’s so big,
- why would we make deals
- and come and actually form some sort of a partnership
- on the issue of, let’s say, Syria?
- That just doesn’t make sense.
- But actually, that occurs all the time
- within the international politics arena.
- And one possible outcome is that we made a deal,
- back-door deal behind the scenes with Russia, OK?
- And as part of the deal, we said, you know,
- with this Boston terror,
- “Here is what we’re going to do."
- " We want you to step back and let us take care of Syria."
- "And we will set up that narrative and we will make it so you won’t look too bad."
- "And as a result, we’ll...”
- — because we switch hats all the time.
- And I’m just going to
- — this is just a little side note here.
- For example, during the Balkans war,
- up until the Balkans war began,
- we had KLA listed with the State Department
- as a terrorist organization, correct?
- During the Balkans war, the State Department,
- they said they were going to remove the “terrorist” label from KLA.
- They became our allies.
- And we said we are no longer going to call them “terrorists”;
- they are the “freedom fighters,” right?
- ROCKWELL: Yeah — (laughing).
- EDMONDS: After we were done with the Balkans, we went back
- — and this is the State Department —
- and they put the labels back again on KLA,
- saying now we are going to go ahead
- and consider them “terrorists” again.
- Another example of that
- would be the Mujahadeen that we just talked about
- — Mujahadeen, al Qaeda.
- They were “freedom fighters,” our allies.
- Then we put the “terrorist” label on them.
- Then we have Mujahadeen-e-Khalq, MEK.
- Some people refer to them as MKO. You know –
- ROCKWELL: Yes.
- EDMONDS: — against Iran, we’ve been using them.
- They used to be “terrorists.”
- There was lobbying, saying we need to lift the “terrorist” label
- because now we want to work with them.
- And at some point, they will go again under the “terrorist” label.
- So this kind of plays out all the time,
- this story within the geopolitical — (laughing) — theater.
- Now, with Chechnyans, they have been working for us,
- these factions, the radical Islamists that we created, armed, trained.
- We are looking at Graham Fuller.
- We are looking at Elliott Abrams.
- We are looking at Mort Abramowitz.
- These people are part of Gladio Operation, Phase 2,
- and they all were stationed in Turkey
- — how amazing is that —
- in the 1990s,
- hen we began the Phase 2 of Gladio Operation.
- Now, with Chechnyans, we say,
- we created them, they are ours,
- but for a while, for Russia’s benefit,
- we’re going to put them under the light of
- they are the big, bad, boogeyman terrorists;
- they are totally tied to al Qaeda;
- they must be destroyed;
- they are terrorists, OK?
- And for a while, let Russia do some housecleaning.
- Because even though it is within Russian territory,
- Russia has been exercising a lot of restraint
- in going and doing, like, major housecleaning,
- meaning, you know, going, executing them
- and having operations, and round them up
- with these radical groups
- in Chechnya and Dagestan and the Abkhazia area,
- OK, right there,
- which Russia didn’t want.
- And also, the international bad rep:
- Here’s the repressive, fascistic Russians
- going after these poor minorities, right?
- Because that’s how we’ve been depicting them.
- They’re the “freedom fighters,” minorities and blah, blah.
- Now, for Russia to go and do some housecleaning
- and lead the Western world,
- especially with the United States being in league,
- portray that as a great counterterrorism support from Russia.
- ”Look, Russia is supporting our war on terror."
- They are going to this region that, now,
- suddenly, overnight, after the Boston terror attack,
- we declared as the hot terrorist bed,
- and they are killing and rounding up these terrorists.
- Good for Russia.”
- In fact, we would applaud them, right?
- No longer the bad rep internationally.
- And we would also restrain any kind of major conflicts
- or direct confrontation from the Azerbaijan or Georgian side.
- And Russia would get that,
- because they’ve been really trying to get into that region,
- even though it’s their own region,
- and do housecleaning.
- As a result, Russians would back off on this whole Syria
- and say, “Fine, just write down a good narrative that we won’t look bad, OK?
- And you go in and invade Syria and we’ll step aside.”
- Low and behold, a couple of weeks,
- a week, 10 days after the Boston terror attack,
- now we have the Syrian WMD story, a la Iraq, OK?
- Bam.
- And not only that, Putin and Obama have been sitting and discussing
- and saying, well — and this is what Putin and Russians,
- they have been already preparing,
- their exclusion, their stepping aside.
- They are saying, “Well, if we prove somehow, someway
- that the Syrian government used chemical weapons
- or the chemical weapons are present,
- there are indicators on the ground that shows that they were used,
- under the Geneva Convention,
- then we are obligated to step aside
- and let this be the problem of the U.S.,
- NATO, the United Nations.”
- And they say, “Look, because the Geneva Convention here is playing out,
- that is why we are no longer supporting Assad’s regime.”
- You see, they had a way out to save face.
- We have a way to get in there with WMD.
- Now, to prove the presence of WMDs,
- the chemicals being used,
- it’s going to be an extremely easy set up,
- because all we have to prove
- — because a lot of people being so ignorant —
- is that there were detectors.
- U.N. people ran tests
- and chemical weapons were present in a high degree.
- Well, we have been in the past six months
- supplying these chemical weapons to our al Qaeda in Syria,
- to the Syrian rebels.
- And Syrian rebels, they have been using it.
- So if you have inspectors going there,
- at least they’re going to come out saying,
- “There is a high degree of chemical weapons residues, et cetera,
- present in the region.”
- And we are going to say
- — the United States and NATO —
- “Here we go. Didn’t we tell you?"
- "They used the chemical weapons.”
- Under the Geneva Convention, Russia is going to say,
- “That is basically the last straw"
- "and we’re no longer going to support Assad.”
- And we are going to invade Syria,
- which I believe is going to happen very, very soon.
- But for the majority who is only looking
- at the U.S. media or the quasi-alternative,
- it’s going to be, well,
- we basically found the chemical weapons
- and it got to a point
- where the Russians had no way but to accept
- that this had to take place, the invasion.
- But if you look at behind the scenes,
- you see Boston terror
- and then you see the Chechnya and with Dagestan.
- And, again, to prove this hypothesis as a likely outcome,
- about less than a week after the Boston terror attack,
- there was this headline within Russian newspapers and even R.T.,
- which was not played out here in the United States,
- that Russians carried out this major operation.
- This was the biggest operation since 2002, Lew.
- They rounded up 142 radical Islamic terrorists
- that were of Chechnyan and Dagestan origin.
- This is the biggest operation Russia has carried out since 2002.
- Again, people are saying that is a coincidence
- that they had this major operation taking place.
- And of course, the Western nations would applaud.
- They have been applauding.
- And then the Syria WMD and Russia backing off,
- people will say, well, that’s a coincidence.
- The fact that the major CIA dirty operative, Graham Fuller,
- happens to be the father-in-law of the Boston terror suspects’ uncle,
- that’s coincidence.
- The fact that the Boston terror suspects,
- they were active, they were participating
- in Jamestown Foundation’s conferences and events,
- that’s coincidence.
- Well, it is sad because you would think
- there’s no way anybody would buy that all these things
- that we are putting within this big picture
- could be true coincidences, you know?
- But unfortunately, as a nation, we have become so numb,
- and we lack critical thinking ability
- that we readily buy into it.
- And of course, the mainstream media being the major player in this
- in packaging and selling what is given to them by the U.S. officials.
- ROCKWELL: Sibel, I can’t thank you enough
- for bringing us up to date on what’s actually going on
- and the sort of dirty business that underlies intelligence
- and empire building
- and all the various activities of the U.S. state.
- I’d love one more question answered.
- We don’t have too much time,
- but just tell us quickly,
- what’s going to happen with poor Iran?
- EDMONDS: What’s going to happen to Iran
- — and, again, I’m even careful not to call it a theory
- because so far we have seen so many experts
- who come up and they make these definitive predictions.
- It really gets on my nerves when people do that
- because things are volatile.
- Things evolve and they evolve.
- They change.
- But I believe, if I’m correct with these back-door deals
- between Russia and the United States,
- which includes Russia doing what they want to do in that region
- and the U.S. taking over Syria,
- while Syria is not as big of a deal for Russia
- — it’s a big deal but not as big of a deal as Iran.
- I believe that back-door deals
- between the U.S. and Russia a
- lso includes hands off Iran
- at least for the next couple of years.
- I don’t believe we are going to see any kind of
- — unless something really evolves,
- if something unexpected surfaces,
- which I doubt it will,
- I believe we have also given our word to Russia
- that, “Yeah, we’ll play the rhetoric and everything,
- but we’re going to go milder on Iran.
- We’re not going to do anything in Iran.”
- Because there is no way Russia is going to back off on the Iran issue.
- There is no way.
- I mean, you are looking at the Caspian Sea.
- You’re looking at a Russian neighbor right there.
- And of course, Iran’s extreme importance
- — it’s not the same deal as Syria.
- So I believe as one of the deal principles that we make with Russia
- is that there’s going to be a hands-off approach with Iran
- for the next, at least, couple of years.
- So I believe we’re not going to see anything with Iran.
- And that’s going to be partly with the deals
- struck between Russians and U.S. officials.
- ROCKWELL: Sibel, it’s great to talk to a real expert.
- And of course, we’re going to link to your book,
- to your website, YouTube, Twitter, everything you’ve got.
- And all I can say is keep on doing what you’re doing.
- Write another book and –
- (LAUGHTER)
- – keep speaking the truth.
- EDMONDS: Thank you very much. Any time. Thank you, Lew.
- ROCKWELL: Bye-bye, Sibel.
- EDMONDS: Bye.
- ROCKWELL: Well, thanks so much for listening to the Lew Rockwell Show today.
- Take a look at all the podcasts.
- There have been hundreds of them.
- There’s a link on the upper right-hand corner of the LRC front page.
- Thank you.
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement