Fatal blow would have left seven-year-old Yaseen Ali Ege ‘doubled up in pain’

SEVEN-YEAR-OLD Yaseen Ali Ege would have cried out, then doubled up in pain as he was fatally injured to the abdomen, a murder trial jury heard yesterday. TUE

Child trauma specialist Dr Ian Maconochie told Cardiff Crown Court that the child’s bowel wall had been split, despite the fact it was behind a protective layer of fat and muscle.

He said: “You have really got to hit someone hard to be able to do that.

“There has to be a considerable amount of force to go through that physical barrier.

“The impact on a child of seven is going to painful.

“There would be an immediate physical reaction – you would double up and cry out.”

Prosecutors claim the city primary school pupil, who was rescued from his blazing home by firefighters in July 2010, was murdered in a beating from his mother and then set alight.

University graduate Sara Ege, 31, denies killing him and attempting to pervert the course of justice by starting the fire at their Severn Road, Canton home with BBQ gel squirted around a bedroom and landing.

Her husband, Royal Mail worker and taxi driver Yousef Ali Ege, 36, has denied failing to prevent his son’s death after it was alleged he must have known about his son’s past injuries, including fractures, and did not protect him.

Sara Ege told police following her arrest that she lost her temper previously and hit Yaseen with a stick “like a dog”.

But she later withdrew that statement, blaming her husband.

Dr Maconochie said there were multiple splits in the bowel which he believed must have been caused by more than one blow.

They would have occurred on impact, causing the contents, including bacteria, to escape into the abdomen setting up reactions which would overwhelm the body and lead to clinical shock.

“It could take as little as a few hours,” he told the eight female and four male jurors.

Asked by Ian Murphy QC, for the prosecution, whether it was the type of case he saw for treatment in the London hospital where he is a consultant in paediatric emergency medicine, the doctor replied: “It certainly would be.

“This is something which would need surgical correction or the patient would be likely to die.

“The child is going to be extremely unwell.

“I would think it would be a matter of a day before he was critically ill and death could occur.”

[proceeding]

JULY 7TH LONDON BOMBING TRIBUTE VIDEO !! WARNING DISTURBING !!

Taxi passengers ‘should not fear for their safety’

Last week a Newport taxi driver was jailed for 12 years after preying on two vulnerable female passengers.

NATALIE CROCKETT, MICHAEL YONG and AILSA CHALK talked to Gwent taxi firms and police about how to stay safe when using taxis alone.

NEWPORT taxi driver Asif Iqbal, who was branded a “predator” by his victims, pleaded guilty to raping two female passengers he had picked up in the city.

Iqbal, 42, of Alice Street, wept in the dock as he was jailed for 12 years at Cardiff Crown Court by Judge David Wynn Morgan.
Judge Morgan said Iqbal, a licensed taxi driver in the city, abused the trust women place in taxi drivers “for the satisfaction of your sexual gratification”.

Following the sentencing, both of Iqbal’s victims said they were glad the case was over, but wanted to issue a warning to other women not to get into cabs on their own.

Newport Council’s outgoing community safety cabinet member William Routley said the council did background checks on all potential taxi drivers before issuing them licences.

He said: “We have a very good organisation in Newport taxi association and many good independent taxi operators. Look for the signs outside the cab for a licence. Use a regulated taxi firm, and use a licensed hackney cab.
Only use cabs which you can see clearly the Newport city logo on them, which they can understand and recognise.

“There are many ways to stay safe. If you can, travel in pairs.

Newport is not an unsafe place to be and taxis are still the safest way to travel here.

Andrew Barley, operations manager at Dragon Taxis in Newport, said the trade was united in its disbelief and anger at Iqbal’s actions, which had tainted a service the public rely on 24 hours a day, 365 days of the year.
He said the firm had been inundated with calls from regular customers who travel alone at night, worried that drivers were free to do as they please when they pick them up. Mr Barley said: “I would say that the vast majority of taxi drivers are good, honest people who want nothing more than to earn a living.

“The people of Newport and Gwent should not be afraid to get a taxi, but should choose one of the reputable companies and prebook to guarantee that they are getting a service they can rely on and trust.”

Lionel Morris, chairman of Newport Taxi Drivers Association, said the case had damaged the reputation of taxi drivers. He said: “This should not stop people taking taxis. It might plant in their minds the possibility of this happening again, and they have a right to think that way. Newport, in general, is very safe. It has been years since something like this happened. I certainly cannot remember this in my time here.”

Malik Haseeb Ahsan, association secretary of Newport Taxi Drivers Association, said: “I am so ashamed of his (Iqbal’s) actions. As a taxi driver you don’t feel comfortable about it. It could happen anywhere to anyone, and it has damaged our industry.

People still need to use taxis though, but it will affect our business.”

Darren Anderson, manager of ABC taxis, said: “We have two female drivers in fleet. We normally get about five to six requests a month for them, if they personally request for them.

We’ve had no trouble from our drivers. If we have any suspicions with them, they will not be here, they would be out the door. We’re also licensed by the council.”

Alan Lakey, 58, owner of Dial-acar taxis, said: “Every taxi driver is police checked, and if they are doing schools, they have to do an enhanced police check. I think they should all be enhanced checked.

“Usually the drivers we employ are people who we know or somebody else knows. The police are very thorough with their background checks.”

Rachel Kent, 42, proprietor of City Lion taxis, said: “Quite a few women are more cautious now to make sure they are with somebody or get a taxi from a proper operator.

“We do background checks on our drivers, and most of our drivers have been with the company for quite a few years.”

Taxi firm owner with Cardiff school contracts appears in court on conspiracy charge

A taxi driver whose firm has contracts with several schools appeared in court yesterday charged following a counter-terrorism investigation into a network suspected of smuggling a banned stimulant drug from Britain to America.
Married father-of-six Daud Ali, 40, of Wakehurst Place, St Mellons, Cardiff, was also charged with possession of a fake Norwegian passport.

He was held – along with co-defendants Adrian Wall, 49, and Liiban Nursharif, 30 – on Tuesday after officers swooped on homes in Cardiff, London and Coventry.

The men were arrested under the Terrorism Act as part of an investigation into the illegal exportation of khat to the US and Canada where it is a controlled substance.
The three men are jointly accused of conspiracy for allegedly mislabelling parcels being sent from the UK.

The three defendants spoke only to confirm their names, dates of birth and addresses when they were brought before Westminster Magistrates’ Court in central London.

They sat with arms folded during the hour-long hearing where Ali and Nursharif were remanded in custody.

Wall was granted bail subject to restrictions.

The three suspects were among seven people arrested by the Met’s counter-terrorism command during a pre-planned, intelligence-led operation earlier this week.

The remaining four suspects – a woman aged 45 and three men aged 47, 45 and 42 – continue to be held under the Terrorism Act, Scotland Yard said.

Homeland Security Investigations in America and officers from the UK’s counter terrorism network, the UK Border Agency and local forces were also involved in the operation.

Wall, a married father of four of Pitt Road, Thornton Heath, Surrey; Nursharif, a single man of no fixed abode and Ali will next appear at Southwark Crown Court for a plea and case management hearing on July 6.

Message to the London Voters

Since the London Mayoral Election is near by, I would like to do us London patriots a favour.
Since Red Ken and many cronies like Red’s and Muslim extremists are going to vote for him at Thursday. I would like you London voters to spare your time and go to the polling station and vote for Boris Johnson.

But I try to spread this message out to the BNP website comments and they will not approve the message.
If your a BNP or UKIP voter, I will urge you to use Boris Johnson as your second preference.
I do not want Red Ken back in because he will fuck London right over again and give us higher taxes and more congestion charge so he can spend it for his luxury meetings and building up more mosques which is a waste of money, bricks and mortar!
The radical left wingers like tree hugging Green party and Liberal Democrats are telling their voters to use Red Ken as their second preference!!!

If your voting for an independent named Siobhan Benita, you know she have links to the Labour party, if you want to vote for her, go on, shes a wasted vote. But make sure you have Boris Johnson as your second preference!

Regardless what you think of Boris, I urge you lot to put a cross next to his name.
The history is repeating itself like in 2008. Red Ken lied that he will step down being mayor, but he just stands up again. I do not want to put up with another 4 years of his dictatorship. I do not want that UAF leader back in as Mayor of London.

Londoners, if you don’t like Tories because of their actions while there in government today, well I afraid that you have to vote for them at the Mayoral election because you have a good candidate named Boris Johnson which he is different then any other Tories.

You know Labour peers at House of Lords are opposing Ken Livingstone, even the boss of the Apprentice Lord Alan Sugar is telling the voters not to vote for Ken.

I really do hope you are getting my message, If you want to copy this message to the London EDL Facebook, or any other place, you are free to do so. Because I want the message to be spread!

And one thing, make sure you bring a pen with you, if you do not have one, you can get one from a shop cheaply, but make sure you bring a pen with you or else you be voting with a pencil. The reason why they give you a pencil is they can rub out your vote and vote for the opposing candidate! But seriously you need to vote with a pen not a pencil!

Thanks

Also check this out!

http://www.facebook.com/borisjohnson << also show your support to Boris Johnson by pressing the Like button on Facebook.

http://www.facebook.com/ken4london << Also bombard the comments on his Facebook page about him being a pro islam and his communist views. Also use the Labour25.com link to expose more about the Labour Party which will put the voters off because it's members are nonces!

http://www.notkenagain.com http://order-order.com/ << also check out the 2 links which will show blog posts about red Ken Livingstone!

http://casualsunited.wordpress.com/2012/04/09/london-mayor-its-simple-you-vote-for-boris-or-you-will-get-ken/ << Casuals United telling their London voters to vote for Boris!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17701218 << UKIP leader is telling their voters to use Boris as their second preference. But not a peep from a BNP about telling their voters who would their second preference be.

Can a moderator also sticky this thread as well because i want to make sure that the message gets through.

I will do my duty on Thursday and vote for Boris! are you?

MP’s twitter rant at foreign workers for serving him ‘worst’ bacon sandwich

Labour backbencher Barry Sheerman claimed he represents ‘the good folk of Huddersfield not Gdansk!’

A Labour MP has been accused of xenophobia after he went on twitter to blame foreign workers for serving him a sub-standard bacon sandwich.

Veteran backbencher Barry Sheerman tweeted: ‘Just had worst coffee and bacon bap in London at Victoria Station. Why can’t Camden Food Co employ English staff?’

Mr Sheerman then defended his post by insisting he represented the people of Huddersfield, West Yorkshire and ‘not Gdansk’.

And when fellow tweeter Nick Lindford responded: ‘On reflection was that tweet not xenophobic?’, Mr Sheerman replied: ‘We are all allowed a small English rant on St George’s day aren’t we?’.

However Mr Linford retorted: ‘Not in my books no, especially not if you are an MP.’

The MP then retorted: ‘I am not a xenophobe. I am an MP and I represent the good folk of Huddersfield not Gdansk!

Mr Sheerman has since defended his comments arguing that British people should be first in line for jobs.

He told the Daily Telegraph: ‘I was in a bit of a hurry to get the right train.

‘The girl who served me couldn’t speak very good English. She got my order wrong and my change wrong – that’s what made me cross.

‘I know she was from Eastern Europe but I don’t know if it was Lithuania or Poland.’
He insisted he was not prejudiced adding: ‘There are a lot of unemployed people in Huddersfield and I think they should have first crack at jobs rather than someone who arrived from Eastern Europe yesterday.

‘The average young person in my constituency has got competition from every young person in Europe.

‘I can see why everyone thinks our country is paved with gold – they all want to come here.

‘I’m getting increasingly worried about the free movement of people across Europe.

‘It’s a very competitive world out there and my constituents resent that.’

Mr Sheerman said politicians should be free to express their views on immigration and blamed political correctness for hindering a politican’s ability to represent his constituents.

How Pakistan Makes Washington Pay for the Afghan War

The US needs access to the Pakistani border into Afghanistan, so Pakistan is playing its advantage for all it’s worth.

The following ingredients should go a long way to produce a political thriller. Mr. M, a jihadist in an Asian state, has emerged as the mastermind of a terrorist attack in a neighboring country, which killed six Americans. After sifting through a vast cache of intelligence and obtaining a legal clearance, the State Department announces a $10 million bounty for information leading to his arrest and conviction. Mr. M promptly appears at a press conference and says, “I am here. America should give that reward money to me.”
A State Department spokesperson explains lamely that the reward is meant for incriminating evidence against Mr. M that would stand up in court. The prime minister of M’s home state condemns foreign interference in his country’s internal affairs. In the midst of this imbroglio, the United States decides to release $1.18 billion in aid to the cash-strapped government of the defiant prime minister to persuade him to reopen supply lines for US and NATO forces bogged down in the hapless neighboring Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.

Alarmingly, this is anything but fiction or a plot for an upcoming international sitcom. It is a brief summary of the latest development in the fraught relations between the United States and Pakistan, two countries locked into an uneasy embrace since September 12, 2001.
Mr. M. is Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, a 62-year-old former academic with a tapering, hennaed beard, and the founder of the Lashkar-e Taiba (the Army of the Pure, or LeT), widely linked to several outrageously audacious terrorist attacks in India. The LeT was formed in 1987 as the military wing of the Jammat-ud Dawa religious organization (Society of the Islamic Call, or JuD) at the instigation of the Pakistani army’s formidable intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). The JuD owes its existence to the efforts of Saeed, who founded it in 1985 following his return to his native Lahore after two years of advanced Islamic studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, under the guidance of that country’s Grand Mufti, Shaikh Abdul Aziz bin Baz.
On its formation, the LeT joined the seven-year-old anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan, an armed insurgency directed and supervised by the ISI with funds and arms supplied by the CIA and the Saudis. Once the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, the Army of the Pure turned its attention to a recently launched anti-Indian jihad in Indian-administered Kashmir and beyond. The terrorist attacks attributed to it range from the devastating multiple assaults in Mumbai in November 2008, which resulted in 166 deaths, including those six Americans, to a foiled attack on the Indian Parliament in New Delhi in December 2001, and a successful January 2010 attack on the airport in Kashmir’s capital Srinagar.

In January 2002, in the wake of Washington’s launching of the Global War on Terror, Pakistan formally banned the LeT, but in reality did little to curb its violent cross-border activities. Saeed remains its final authority. In a confession, offered as part of a plea bargain after his arrest in October 2009 in Chicago, David Coleman Headley, a Pakistani-American operative of LeT involved in planning the Mumbai carnage, said: “Hafiz Saeed had full knowledge of the Mumbai attacks and they were launched only after his approval.”
In December 2008, the United Nations Security Council declared the JuD a front organization for the banned LeT. The provincial Punjab government then placed Saeed under house arrest using the Maintenance of Public Order law. But six months later, the Lahore High Court declared his confinement unconstitutional. In August 2009, Interpol issued a Red Corner Notice, essentially an international arrest warrant, against Saeed in response to Indian requests for his extradition. Saeed was again put under house arrest but in October the Lahore High Court quashed all charges against him due to lack of evidence.
It is common knowledge that Pakistani judges, fearing for their lives, generally refrain from convicting high-profile jihadists with political connections. When, in the face of compelling evidence, a judge has no option but to order the sentence enjoined by the law, he must either live under guard afterwards or leave the country. Such was the case with Judge Pervez Ali Shah who tried Mumtaz Qadri, the jihadist bodyguard who murdered Punjab’s governor Salman Taseer for backing an amendment to the indiscriminately applied blasphemy law. Soon after sentencing Qadri to capital punishment last October, Shah received several death threats and was forced into self-exile.
Aware of the failures of the Pakistani authorities to convict Saeed, US agencies seemed to have checked and cross-checked the authenticity of the evidence they had collected on him before the State Department announced, on April 2nd, its reward for his arrest. This was nothing less than an implied declaration of Washington’s lack of confidence in the executive and judicial organs of Pakistan.

Little wonder that Pakistani Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani took umbrage, describing the US bounty as blatant interference in his country’s domestic affairs. Actually, this is nothing new. It is an open secret that, in the ongoing tussle between Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari and his bête noire, army chief of staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the Obama administration has always backed the civilian head of state. That, in turn, has been a significant factor in Gilani’s stay in office since March 2008, longer than any other prime minister in Pakistan’s history.

How to Trump a Superpower

Given such strong cards, diplomatic and legal, why then did the Obama administration commit itself to releasing more than $1 billion to a government that has challenged its attempt to bring to justice an alleged mastermind of cross-border terrorism?

The answer lies in what happened at two Pakistani border posts 1.5 miles from the Afghan frontier in the early hours of November 26, 2011. NATO fighter aircraft and helicopters based in Afghanistan carried out a two-hour-long raid on these posts, killing 24 soldiers. Enraged, Pakistan’s government shut the two border crossings through which the US and NATO had until then sent a significant portion of their war supplies into Afghanistan. Its officials also forced the US to vacate Shamsi air base, which was being used by the CIA as a staging area for its drone air war in Pakistan’s tribal areas along the Afghan border. The drone strikes are exceedingly unpopular – one poll found 97 percent of respondents viewed them negatively—and they are vehemently condemned by a large section of the Pakistani public and its politicians.

Furthermore, the government ordered a comprehensive review of all programs, activities, and cooperation arrangements with the US and NATO. It also instructed the country’s two-tier parliament to conduct a thorough review of Islamabad’s relations with Washington. Having taken the moral high ground, the Pakistani government pressed its demands on the Obama administration.

An appointed Parliamentary Committee on National Security (PCNS) then deliberately moved at a snail’s pace to perform the task on hand, while the Pentagon explored alternative ways of ferrying goods into Afghanistan via other countries to sustain its war there. By contrast, a vociferous campaign against the reopening of the Pakistani supply lines led by the Difa-e Pakistan Council (Defense of Pakistan), representing 40 religious and political groups, headed by Hafiz Saeed, took off. Its leaders have addressed huge rallies in major Pakistani cities. It was quick to condemn Washington’s bounty on Saeed, describing it as “a nefarious attempt” to undermine the Council’s drive to protect the country’s sovereignty.

Meanwhile, the loss of the daily traffic of 500 trucks worth of food, fuel, and weapons from the Pakistani port of Karachi through the Torkham and Chaman border crossings into Afghanistan, though little publicized in US media, has undermined the fighting capability of US and NATO forces.

Shocking Pic Of Care Home Worker Hitting OAP

A daughter secretly filmed a care home worker assaulting her Alzheimers patient mother.

Footage of an Alzheimer’s sufferer being repeatedly beaten by a member of staff at a care home will be screened on TV.
The clips claim to show an elderly resident being manhandled by carers at Ash Court Care Centre in Kentish Town, London last year.
The footage, which will be aired on BBC’s Panorama, was caught after Maria Worroll’s daughter Jane hid a camera in her room.
Jonathan Aquino, 30, was jailed earlier this month for the assault on Mrs Worroll. The Filipino was sentenced to 18 months in jail at Blackfriars Crown Court.
Four of Aquino’s female colleagues have since been sacked by the operators of the home, Forest Healthcare, after it reviewed the footage, the documentary says. This is the first time the footage will be aired.
Despite suffering from acute arthritis, Mrs Worroll, 80, was said to be manhandled by her carers and on occasion put to bed at only 5.30pm. On other occasions carers would not greet Mrs Worroll but instead turn on a television to watch while they were in her room, it is claimed.
The documentary also says that one evening’s footage, filmed in June 2011, shows a male carer striking Mrs Worroll six times on the face, arms and abdomen. Mrs Worroll was subsequently transferred to a different home.
The Care Quality Commission, the industry watchdog, awarded the care home an ‘excellent’ rating just three months before the attacks. A subsequent report, produced four months after the incidents, also failed to mention that charges were pending over the incidents, it is claimed.
Judy Downey, head of charity The Relatives and Residents Association, said: “It doesn’t say that a member of staff has been charged. It is not an honest document, it isn’t a helpful document and it isn’t a decent document.
“This is an area where the CQC can do so much if it uses its powers. They can actually cancel the provider’s registration if they’re shown not to be fit. We would suggest that the provider was very clearly shown not to be fit.”

Cardiff councillor Mohammed Islam in racism blast at UK Border Agency

A Cardiff councillor has levelled an astonishing broadside at the UK Border Agency by accusing the authority of “indirect racism”.

Riverside councillor Mohammed Islam claims officers have targeted businesses in his ward following an incident last year where another councillor passed a constituent’s tip-off to officials.

Coun Islam, who has represented the ward since June 2004, claims UKBA is “basically going to every single Asian and ethnic minority business” in the area to check whether staff are legally entitled to work.

“Personally I strongly feel it’s indirect racism, I would say,” the Plaid Cymru councillor told the Echo.

But immigration minister Damian Green rejected the allegations and said: “We target immigration offenders – not specific nationalities.”

Coun Islam claims there has been a spike in visits by officers since fellow Riverside councillor Iona Gordon passed on to UKBA a tip-off sent to councillors that a businessman in their ward was employing illegal staff.

“If they have got to go to go and do a random check fair enough, they have got a right,” said Coun Islam. “But if they pick and choose Asian businesses it gives the question of why this kind of business.”

A spokesman for UKBA said they had “no record” of visiting the firms mentioned in the e-mail, which was sent to Coun Gordon and Coun Islam on December 9 last year.

A leaflet – seen by the Echo – that Coun Islam said was produced by people from “various parts of the city” states there will be a protest outside UKBA’s offices in Newport Road, Cardiff, on Saturday.

The leaflet alleges black and minority ethnic-run businesses have been “targeted” by immigration authorities in recent weeks and adds: “This is unacceptable and must end now.”

A propaganda letter from Plaid intended for voters in Riverside, also seen by the Echo, claims Coun Gordon has been “busy reporting local businesses to the UK Border Agency”.

Responding to the claims, Coun Gordon said: “It is the moral duty of an elected councillor presented with allegations of lawbreaking to pass them on to the appropriate public authority for investigation.

“Is Coun Islam saying that is wrong and that he is willing to turn a blind eye to allegations of lawbreaking?

“In December Coun Islam passed me information from a local Asian resident about poor housing conditions in a Riverside house and asked me to take it up, which I did. This local resident then e-mailed both myself and Coun Islam making allegations about illegal immigrants being employed in a local restaurant.

“I forwarded the e-mail to the appropriate agency for them to investigate. It is not for me to investigate such matters.

“Not only did Coun Islam not report this potential lawbreaking, but he has now revealed a matter that I believe should have remained confidential to the press, to his Plaid Cymru colleagues and to local people presumably to seek to discredit me in the run up to the local elections.

“Coun Islam and I represent different political parties but once elected we represent all the residents in Riverside regardless of their ethnicity. All I did last December was to forward, in good faith, information I was given by an Asian constituent to the appropriate authority for them to investigate.”

Immigration minister Damian Green said: “We target immigration offenders – not specific nationalities.

“When we receive clear intelligence that offences are being committed we take action.

“So far this month, we have carried out around 30 operations at businesses and residential addresses across South Wales targeting suspected offenders from a range of nationalities.”

Read More http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/welsh-politics/welsh-politics-news/2012/04/23/cardiff-councillor-mohammed-islam-in-racism-blast-at-uk-border-agency-91466-30815750/#ixzz1stAAOYMN

Sword Play: Attacking Civilians to Justify “Greater Security”

You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force … the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”

This was the essence of Operation Gladio, a decades-long covert campaign of terrorism and deceit directed by the intelligence services of the West — against their own populations. Hundreds of innocent people were killed or maimed in terrorist attacks — on train stations, supermarkets, cafes and offices — which were then blamed on “leftist subversives” or other political opponents. The purpose, as stated above in sworn testimony by Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra, was to demonize designated enemies and frighten the public into supporting ever-increasing powers for government leaders — and their elitist cronies.

First revealed by Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti in 1991, Gladio (from the Latin for “sword”) is still protected to this day by its founding patrons, the CIA and MI6. Yet parliamentary investigations in Italy, Switzerland and Belgium have shaken out a few fragments of the truth over the years. These have been gathered in a new book, “NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe,” by Daniele Ganser, as Lila Rajiva reports on CommonDreams.org.

Originally set up as a network of clandestine cells to be activated behind the lines in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe, Gladio quickly expanded into a tool for political repression and manipulation, directed by NATO and Washington. Using right-wing militias, underworld figures, government provocateurs and secret military units, Gladio not only carried out widespread terrorism, assassinations and electoral subversion in democratic states such as Italy, France and West Germany, but also bolstered fascist tyrannies in Spain and Portugal, abetted the military coup in Greece and aided Turkey’s repression of the Kurds.

Among the “smoking guns” unearthed by Ganser is a Pentagon document, Field Manual FM 30-31B, which details the methodology for launching terrorist attacks in nations that “do not react with sufficient effectiveness” against “communist subversion.” Ironically, the manual states that the most dangerous moment comes when leftist groups “renounce the use of force” and embrace the democratic process. It is then that “U.S. army intelligence must have the means of launching special operations which will convince Host Country Governments and public opinion of the reality of the insurgent danger.” Naturally, these peace-throttling “special operations must remain strictly secret,” the document warns.

Indeed, it would not do for the families of the 85 people ripped apart by the Aug. 2, 1980 bombing of the Bologna train station to know that their loved ones had been murdered by “men inside Italian state institutions and … men linked to the structures of United States intelligence,” as the Italian Senate concluded after its investigation in 2000.

The Bologna atrocity is an example of what Gladio’s masters called “the strategy of tension” — fomenting fear to keep populations in thrall to “strong leaders” who will protect the nation from the ever-present terrorist threat. And as Rajiva notes, this strategy wasn’t limited to Western Europe. It was applied, with gruesome effectiveness, in Central America by the Reagan and Bush administrations. During the 1980s, right-wing death squads, guerrilla armies and state security forces — armed, trained and supplied by the United States — murdered tens of thousands of people throughout the region, often acting with particular savagery at those times when peaceful solutions to the conflicts seemed about to take hold.

Last month, it was widely reported that the Pentagon is considering a similar program in Iraq. What was not reported, however — except in the Iraqi press — is that at least one pro-occupation death squad is already in operation. Just days after the Pentagon plans were revealed, a new militant group, “Saraya Iraqna,” began offering big wads of American cash for insurgent scalps — up to $50,000, the Iraqi paper Al Ittihad reports. “Our activity will not be selective,” the group promised. In other words, anyone they consider an enemy of the state will be fair game.

Strangely enough, just as it appears that the Pentagon is establishing Gladio-style operations in Iraq, there has been a sudden rash of terrorist attacks on outrageously provocative civilian targets, such as hospitals and schools, the Guardian reports. Coming just after national elections in which the majority faction supported slates calling for a speedy end to the American occupation, the shift toward high-profile civilian slaughter has underscored the “urgent need” for U.S. forces to remain on the scene indefinitely, to provide security against the ever-present terrorist threat. Meanwhile, the Bushists continue constructing their long-sought permanent bases in Iraq: citadels to protect the oil that incoming Iraqi officials are promising to sell off to American corporations — and launching pads for new forays in geopolitical domination.

Perhaps it’s just a coincidence. But the U.S. elite’s history of directing and fomenting terrorist attacks against friendly populations is so extensive — indeed, so ingrained and accepted — that it calls into question the origin of every terrorist act that roils the world. With each fresh atrocity, we’re forced to ask: Was it the work of “genuine” terrorists or a “black op” by intelligence agencies — or both?

While not infallible, the ancient Latin question is still the best guide to penetrating the bloody murk of modern terrorism: Cui bono? Who benefits? Whose powers and policies are enhanced by the attack? For it is indisputable that the “strategy of tension” means power and profit for those who claim to possess the key to “security.” And from the halls of the Kremlin to the banks of the Potomac, this cynical strategy is the ruling ideology of our times.