This shouldn’t come as a surprise to those who have been able to remain objective about U.S. foreign policy, regardless of what letter the president has after his name. Let’s not forget that years before Osama bin Laden was our archenemy, he was our ally to whom the U.S. provided funding, training, manpower and weapons in order for his team of Mujahedeen to help accomplish our geopolitical goals. In fact, the CIA labeled this group of recruits placed under bin Laden’s leadership “Al-Qaeda,” or “The Database.”
Al-Qaeda wouldn’t be here today if it weren’t for the U.S.’s covert funding of it. Our foreign policy demands an credible enemy to justify our presence in the Middle East, and Al-Qaeda has worked wonderfully.
They’re not so much a terrorist organization as they are a U.S.-funded controlled opposition force. As long as they get adequate funding and military supplies, they will continue to recruit new members, go on terrorist rampages throughout that region, destabilizing nations and necessitating (so they say) Western involvement either through covert funding or military presence.
The geopolitical engineers strike the perfect balance between engaging Al-Qaeda in combat on the one hand, and giving them financial support on the other. We don’t want to wipe Al-Qaeda out completely, because then we wouldn’t have an excuse to be there. And we can’t let them take over the region completely, because the U.S. wants to be the ones in control. There has to be that balance to keep this war a vicious cycle; ongoing and never-ending.
So, it should come as no surprise that the U.S. Army has been awarding contracts to members of Al-Qaeda and known Al-Qaeda front organizations in Afghanistan that go toward “reconstruction” of the country. And the Army doesn’t seem to care. Their excuse is that terminating these contracts would constitute a “due process rights” violation.
John Sopko is the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR). He released a lengthy report, exposing these contracts and the Army’s refusal to terminate them:
“In conclusion I would also like to reiterate the concerns I raised in our last report about the Army’s refusal to act on SIGAR’s recommendations to prevent supporters of the insurgency, including supporters of the Taliban, the Haqqani network and al-Qaeda, from receiving government contracts. SIGAR referred 43 such cases to the Army recommending suspension and debarment, based on detailed supporting information demonstrating that these individuals and companies are providing material support to the insurgency in Afghanistan. But the Army rejected all 43 cases. The Army Suspension and Debarment Office appears to believe that suspension or debarment of these individuals and companies would be a violation of their due process rights if based on classified information or if based on findings by the Department of Commerce. I am deeply troubled that the U.S. military can pursue, attack, and even kill terrorists and their supporters, but that some in the US government believe we cannot prevent these same people from receiving a government contract.”
If our government really wanted to win the “war on terror,” they would stop giving terrorist organizations money and weapons through all available channels and pretending to fight them. It’s that simple. Al-Qaeda would collapse.
But then our government wouldn’t be able to terrorize the American people with the constant fear of terrorist attacks. It’s that fear of the boogeyman that makes Americans so willing to give up liberties and to be controlled by an insatiably power-hungry government.