Israel’s Hand in Guatemala’s Genocide | Consortiumnews

Israel’s Hand in Guatemala’s Genocide | Consortiumnews

Israel’s Hand in Guatemala’s Genocide

January 14, 2014

From the Archive: As world leaders struggle to praise the late Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, infamous for abetting the 1982 massacre of Palestinian civilians at Sabra and Shatila in Lebanon, another grim chapter of Sharon’s history was his role in the Guatemalan genocide, Robert Parry wrote in 2013.

By Robert Parry (Originally published on May 23, 2013)

At the height of Guatemala’s mass slaughters in the 1980s, including genocide against the Ixil Indians, the Reagan administration worked with Israeli officials to provide helicopters that the Guatemalan army used to hunt down fleeing villagers, according to documentary and eyewitness evidence.

During testimony at the recent genocide trial of former Guatemalan dictator Efrain Rios Montt, one surprise was how often massacre survivors cited the Army’s use of helicopters in the scorched-earth offensives.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. (Photo credit: Jim Wallace of the Smithsonian Institution)

Journalist Allan Nairn, who covered the war in Guatemala and attended the Rios Montt trial, said in an interview, “one interesting thing that came out in the trial, as witness after witness testified, was a very substantial number of them talked about fleeing into the mountains and being bombed, attacked and machine gunned from U.S. planes and helicopters.

“At the time this was going on, I was aware this was happening in some cases, but from the testimony of the witnesses, it sounded like these attacks from U.S. planes and helicopters were more frequent than we realized at the time. That’s an example of how we don’t know the whole story yet – how extensive the U.S. complicity was in these crimes.”

Part of the mystery was where did Guatemala’s UH-1H “Huey” helicopters come from, since the U.S. Congress continued to resist military sales to Guatemala because of its wretched human rights record. The answer appears to be that some helicopters were arranged secretly by President Ronald Reagan’s National Security Council staff through Israeli intelligence networks.

Rios Montt began pressing the United States for 10 UH-1H helicopters in June 1983, as his military campaign was ramping up. Since Guatemala lacked the U.S. Foreign Military Sales credits or the cash to buy the helicopters, Reagan’s national security team looked for unconventional ways to arrange the delivery of the equipment.

On Aug. 1, 1983, NSC aides Oliver North and Alfonso Sapia-Bosch reported to National Security Advisor William P. Clark that his deputy Robert “Bud” McFarlane was planning to exploit his Israeli channels to secure the helicopters for Guatemala, according to a document that I discovered at Reagan’s presidential library.

“With regard to the loan of ten helicopters, it is [our] understanding that Bud will take this up with the Israelis,” wrote North and Sapia-Bosch. “There are expectations that they would be forthcoming. Another possibility is to have an exercise with the Guatemalans. We would then use US mechanics and Guatemalan parts to bring their helicopters up to snuff.”

By then, McFarlane had a long and intimate relationship with Israeli intelligence involving various backdoor deals. [For more on McFarlane's Israeli channels, see Consortiumnews.com's "How Neocons Messed Up the Mideast."]

Israeli Channel

McFarlane’s approach to Israel for the helicopters was successful, according to former Israeli intelligence officer Ari Ben-Menashe, who described some of the history behind Israel’s activities in Guatemala in his 1992 memoir, Profits of War.

Ben-Menashe traced the Israeli arms sales to Guatemala back to a private network established in the 1970s by Gen. Ariel Sharon during a gap when Sharon was out of the government. Sharon’s key representative in Guatemala was a businessman named Pesach Ben-Or, and through that channel, Israel supplied military gear to Guatemala’s security services in the 1980s, Ben-Menashe wrote.

(In the early 1980s, Sharon was Israel’s Minister of Defense collaborating with the Reagan administration on secret shipments of weapons to Iran and claiming a green light for the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, which led to the massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in 1982, carried out by Israel’s Christian Lebanese allies under Sharon’s protection.)

In an interview in May 2013, Ben-Menashe said the Israelis supplied a total of six helicopters to the Guatemalans along with computers and software to keep track of alleged subversives who could then be identified and executed. Ben-Menashe said he learned of the mass slaughters during his travels to Guatemala and reported back to his Israeli superiors about the atrocities involving the equipment that they had authorized. The response, he said, was concern but inaction.

“They weren’t for killing these people, not at all,” Ben-Menashe said. “But they thought their interest was to help the Reagan people. If the Reagan people wanted it [the equipment sent to Guatemala], they would do it. [They thought,] ‘this is bad, but is it any of our business? Our American friends are asking for our help, so we should help them.’”

After our phone interview had ended, Ben-Menashe called me back to stress that the Israelis were unaware of the genocidal nature of the Guatemalan military campaigns against the Ixil Indians, although the Israelis did recognize that they were assisting in mass murders of dark-skinned Guatemalans; the distinction being that the Israelis did not identify the slaughters as genocide against a specific racial or ethnic group.

“As we saw it, they [Guatemalan military authorities] were targeting all non-white villagers who were sitting on fertile lands that the white Guatemalans wanted,” he said, adding that when he reported this information to his superiors, “the Israelis rolled their eyes [in dismay] but said, ‘this is what our friends in the Reagan administration want.’” [For more on Ben-Menashe's work for Israeli intelligence, see Robert Parry's Secrecy & Privilege and America's Stolen Narrative.]

Besides the helicopters for hunting down villagers who fled into the jungles, the computer equipment and the sophisticated software made the Guatemalan killing machine vastly more efficient in the towns and cities. A former U.S. Green Beret operating in Guatemala once told me that he witnessed Guatemalan security forces stopping buses and inputting identification numbers of the passengers into a computer to select those who would be dragged off to the side of the road and summarily shot.

Death Lists

From first-hand reporting in Guatemala, journalist Nairn also observed the security advantages gained from detailed death lists. Nairn said soldiers under Gen. Otto Perez Molina, the current president, “described how they would go into town armed with death lists provided them by G2 military intelligence, death lists of people who were suspected of being collaborators of the guerrillas or critics of the army.

“They told how they would strangle people with lassos, slit women open with machetes, shoot people in the head in front of the neighbors, use U.S. planes, helicopters and 50 gram bombs to attack people if they fled into the hills.”

Nairn said, “The U.S. had also arranged for Israel to step in and become the principal supplier of hardware to the Guatemalan army, in particular assault rifles, the Galil automatic rifle. This was because the administration was running into problems with Congress, which wouldn’t go along with a lot of their plans to aid the Guatemalan military, so they did an end run by using the government of Israel.”

Though the focus of the case against Rios Montt has been the genocide inflicted on Ixil villages in the northern highlands – where some 626 villages were eradicated by the Guatemalan military – those massacres were only part of the estimated 200,000 killings perpetrated by right-wing Guatemalan regimes since a CIA-sponsored coup ousted an elected government in 1954.

The bloodbath was at its worst in the 1980s during Ronald Reagan’s presidency as he encouraged the anti-leftist slaughters that claimed the lives of some 100,000 Guatemalans. Reagan expanded his support for the Guatemalan security forces even though the CIA was keeping his administration informed of the systematic killings underway.

Another document that I discovered in the archives of the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California, revealed that Reagan and his national security team in 1981 agreed to supply military aid to Guatemala’s dictators so they could pursue the goal of exterminating not only “Marxist guerrillas” but people associated with their “civilian support mechanisms.” [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Ronald Reagan: Accessory to Genocide.”]

As for Rios Montt, who ruled Guatemala for 17 especially bloody months in 1982-83, the now 87-year-old ex-general was convicted of genocide and crimes against humanity by a criminal court on May 10, 2013, and was sentenced to 80 years in prison.

But that conviction was overturned on a 3-2 vote by Guatemala’s Constitutional Court which is still dominated by allies of the military and the oligarchy. As for the Reagan administration officials and the Israelis who aided and abetted Rios Montt and his fellow generals, there is no indication that any accountability will be exacted.

US-School of Assassins - "School of Americas" in the state of Georgia

Guatemala, 1983 - Clergy traveled in military helicopters to the mass of Pope John Paul II in the war zone - Notebook - Simon Griffee · Photographer

[This shows which side the Vatican was on]

Guatemala, 1983 - Clergy traveled in military helicopters to the mass of Pope John Paul II in the war zone

Published 30 April 2011

Photograph by James Nachtwey from his Deeds of War project.

In Guatemala, the central government — controlled by a oligarchy of European decent — was waging a scorched earth campaign against an indigenous rebellion, and I saw an image that reflected the history of Latin America: conquest through a combination of the Bible and the sword.

— Transcript of James Nachtwey’s Searing pictures of war

Show to a Friend

Simon Griffee · Photographer

• Notebook
 
• Stories
 
• About
 
• Contact

• ← Before
 
• Random
 
• Archives
 
• After →

© 2014 Simon Griffee. All rights reserved.

SITE DISCLAIMER This page and all others linked to it — All copyrighted sources are quoted and used for comment and education in accord with the nonprofit provisions of: Title 17 U.S.C., Section 107. These use of these sites is in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., Section 107 and is protected under: The First Amendment Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;

See: "Ratline Frankie the Berg" Bergoglio

How Reagan Promoted Genocide

How Reagan Promoted Genocide
2013 02 21

By Robert Parry | GlobalResearch.ca

A newly discovered document reveals that President Reagan and his national security team in 1981 approved Guatemala’s extermination of both leftist guerrillas and their “civilian support mechanisms,” a green light that opened a path to genocide against hundreds of Mayan villages.

Soon after taking office in 1981, President Ronald Reagan’s national security team agreed to supply military aid to the brutal right-wing regime in Guatemala to pursue the goal of exterminating not only “Marxist guerrillas” but their “civilian support mechanisms,” according to a newly disclosed document from the National Archives.

Over the next several years, the military assistance from the Reagan administration assisted the Guatemalan army in doing just that, engaging in the slaughter of some 100,000 people, including what a truth commission deemed genocide against the Mayan Indians in the northern highlands.

The recently discovered documents at the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, also reveal that Reagan’s White House was reaching out to Israel in a scheme to circumvent congressional restrictions on military equipment for the Guatemalan military.

In 1983, national security aide Oliver North (who later became a central figure in the Iran-Contra scandal) reported in a memo that Reagan’s Deputy National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane (another key Iran-Contra figure) was approaching Israel over how to deliver 10 UH-1H helicopters to Guatemala to give the army greater mobility in its counterinsurgency war.

According to these documents that I found at the Reagan library – and other records declassified in the late 1990s – it’s also clear that Reagan and his administration were well aware of the butchery underway in Guatemala and elsewhere in Central America.

The relaxed attitude toward the Guatemalan regime’s brutality took shape in spring 1981 as Reagan’s State Department “advised our Central American embassies that it has been studying ways to restore a closer, cooperative relationship with Guatemala,” according to a White House “Situation Room Checklist” dated April 8, 1981.

The document added: “State believes a number of changes have occurred which could make Guatemalan leaders more receptive to a new U.S. initiative: the Guatemalans view the new administration as more sympathetic to their problems [and] they are less suspect of the U.S. role in El Salvador,” where the Reagan administration was expanding support for another right-wing regime infamous for slaughtering its political opponents, including Catholic clergy.

“State has concluded that any attempt to reestablish a dialogue would require some initial, condition-free demonstration of our goodwill. However, this could not include military sales which would provoke serious U.S. public and congressional criticism. State will undertake a series of confidence building measures, free of preconditions, which minimize potential conflict with existing legislation,” which then barred military assistance to Guatemala because of its long record of human rights crimes.

The “checklist” added that the State Department “has also decided that the administration should engage the Guatemalan government at the highest level in a dialogue on our bilateral relations and the initiatives we can take together to improve them. Secretary [of State Alexander] Haig has designated [retired] General Vernon Walters as his personal emissary to initiate this process with President [Fernando Romeo] Lucas [Garcia].

“If Lucas is prepared to give assurances that he will take steps to halt government involvement in the indiscriminate killing of political opponents and to foster a climate conducive to a viable electoral process, the U.S. will be prepared to approve some military sales immediately.”

But the operative word in that paragraph was “indiscriminate.” The Reagan administration expressed no problem with killing civilians if they were considered supporters of the guerrillas who had been fighting against the country’s ruling oligarchs and generals since the 1950s when the CIA organized the overthrow of Guatemala’s reformist President Jacobo Arbenz.

[...]

Read the full article at: globalresearch.ca

Related Articles

Reagan & Guatemala’s Death Files 

Reagan Was Behind "One Of The Most Intensive Campaigns Of Mass Murder In Recent History" 

Reagan and CIA belong in the dock with former Guatemalan dictator 

___________________________________________________________________________________

When gangstalking takes to the air

Obedience to authority

Obedience to authority

Many people wonder why these informants go along with this? Why would anyone go along with causing the suicide of their fellow citizens, or enacting cruelty on someones cats, dogs, kids, family, property etc? Why would you knowingly go along with a practice that many would consider to be evil?

The answer is obedience to authority. As long as an authority figure is giving the orders, experiments have shown that most people will go along with whatever is being ordered, even if those orders are to inflict pain on another human being.

Let’s start with the Milgram experiments.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mst1h31daV4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

[quote]Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.[4]

[/quote]

As part of the experiment a stranger off the street is asked to shock an individual as part of a learning or behaviour modification experiment. The person doing the shocking is told that this will help the person to learn the answers to the question. The person being shocked has agreed to the experiment.

The person giving the shocks is giving a test shock of the lowest voltage to see what the pain is like. It’s not pleasant. They are told that if the person fails to answer the question, they are to increase the voltage and to keep shocking the person till they get the answer correct.

The person giving the answers starts to get the questions wrong, they are asked to keep going by the person in authority. The person answering the questions, starts to scream out in pain, sometimes even screaming, my heart, my heart.

Many times the person giving the shock wants to stop what they are doing, but they are told don’t pay it any mind we have to keep going, and so they are goaded on by the experimenter to the end of the experiment. 65% of those in the studied continued to the very end of the voltage metre.
Now imagine you are an average citizen, you are asked to become an Informant by the state, country that you love. At some point you realise that what you are doing is wrong and that people are being harmed. Let’s say you come across a Gang Stalking website, and realise what you are taking part in. How can you stop?

First you are bound by a gag order, so you can’t say anything. Second if you go to the police, local authorities, they are taking part, so you can’t go there, human rights organizations, the same thing. Since becoming an Informant you realise that this is systemic and that the majority of your community is in some way taking part. What do you do where do you turn?

You can ask to not take part, but many people are afraid of being targeted themselves the same way, experiencing the same sort of harassment. There is a real cult like mentality about what is happening, even if most people do not identify it as such, so how would you get out, much less help the target?

In many cases they can’t, and some of them are as trapped as we are. Either get the punishment or give the punishment. Not a great choice. This is not true for all of them, some are just really lowlifes and happy to go along with this, and would report anyone not following suit.

Within the system you can try to hint to the target about what is happening, try to help expose what is happening. Don’t allow yourself to feel or become powerless, keep thinking, keep finding ways, try to keep feeling. If you let the stress of the situation overwhelm you, a part of you disassociates emotionally, and you became biddable, capable of not much but following orders.
How quickly can this shift come about, in a really short space of time. The Milgram experiment happened within an hour or two.
The next experiment happened over a few days.

The Stanford Prison Experiment.

http://www.prisonexp.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

The scary part about this, is that thy knew in advance that they were part of an experiment, they were paid for it, they agreed to it and everything.
The experiment was suppose to last 2 weeks, but had to be ended after six days. One group of students were assigned to the role of prisoners, another to the role of guards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0jYx8nwjFQ

[quote]
As the experiment proceeded, several guards became progressively sadistic. Experimenters said that approximately one-third of the guards exhibited genuine sadistic tendencies. Interestingly, most of the guards were upset when the experiment concluded early.

Zimbardo argued that the prisoner participants had internalized their roles, based on the fact that some had stated that they would accept parole even with the attached condition of forfeiting all of their experiment-participation pay. Yet, when their parole applications were all denied, none of the prisoner participants quit the experiment. Zimbardo argued they had no reason for continued participation in the experiment after having lost all monetary compensation, yet they did, because they had internalised the prisoner identity, they thought themselves prisoners, hence, they stayed.
[/quote]
The prisoners (students pretending to be prisoners) started to riot, the cops (students pretending to be cops) started to get brutal with them. Made them do all sorts of sick and sadistic things. Tried to get some to turn into snitches, one prisoner faked being crazy to get out, they turned on each other in some cases, and just fell in line with obeying authority, in most cases. The person conducting the experiment actually thought he was a warden, he got so caught up in the role.

[quote]In psychology, the results of the experiment are said to support situational attributions of behavior rather than dispositional attribution. In other words, it seemed the situation caused the participants’ behavior, rather than anything inherent in their individual personalities. In this way, it is compatible with the results of the also-famous Milgram experiment, in which ordinary people fulfilled orders to administer what appeared to be damaging electric shocks to a confederate of the experimenter.[/quote]

The experiment at the time was used to help better understand the psychological changes that prisoners and their jailers go through. Later it was used to help explain the situation at Abu Ghraib with the prisoner abuses.



The Strip Search Prank Call
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strip_search_prank_call_scam
This experiment was anything but. Because a crank caller pretended to be an authority figure. A Police officer, average people were willing to carry out horrible actions on innocent people.

[quote]The strip search prank call scam was a series of incidents occurring for roughly a decade before 2004. These incidents involved a man calling a restaurant, claiming to be a police detective, and convincing managers to conduct strip-searches of female employees. Reports of over 70 such occurrences in 30 U.S. states finally led to the arrest and charging of David R. Stewart, a 37-year-old Florida corrections officer.[/quote]
These are a few of the incidents that occurred in the wake of these phone calls.

[quote]
A call to a McDonald’s restaurant in Hinesville, Georgia resulted in a janitor performing a body cavity search on a 19-year old cashier.[5]
A 17-year-old customer at a Taco Bell in Phoenix, Arizona was strip-searched by a manager receiving this kind of prank call.[6]

On Nov. 30, 2000, the caller persuaded the manager at a McDonald’s in Leitchfield, Kentucky, to remove her own clothes in front of a customer whom the caller said was suspected of sex offenses. The caller promised that undercover officers would burst in and arrest the customer the moment he attempted to molest her, said Detective Lt. Gary Troutman of the Leitchfield Police Department.[7]

On May 29, 2002, a girl celebrating her 18th birthday — in her first hour of her first day on the job at the McDonald’s in Roosevelt, Iowa — was forced to strip, jog naked and assume a series of embarrassing poses, all at the direction of a caller on the phone, according to court and news accounts.[8]

On Jan. 26, 2003, according a police report in Davenport, Iowa, an assistant manager at an Applebee’s Neighborhood Grill & Bar conducted a degrading 90-minute search of a waitress at the behest of a caller who said he was a regional manager — even though the man had called collect, and despite the fact the assistant manager had read a company memo warning about hoax calls just a month earlier. He later told police he’d forgotten about the memo.[9] [/quote]



The callers downfall came when he was able to get one of these sheeple to sexually assault a teenage girl over the phone. All the while giving the instructions. She complied, because she was scared, frightened and an authority figure was on the phone giving instructions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFXeXK3szOk

http://www.mahalo.com/Louise_Ogborn_Video

[quote]
The final prank call in this scheme was made to a McDonald’s restaurant in Mount Washington, Kentucky on April 9, 2004. According to assistant manager Donna Summers, the caller identified himself as a policeman, ‘Officer Scott’, he described an employee whom he said was suspected of stealing a customer’s purse. Summers called 18-year-old employee Louise Ogborn to her office and told her of the suspicion. Following the instructions of the caller, Summers ordered Ogborn first to empty her pockets, and finally to remove all her clothing except for an apron, in an effort to find the stolen items. Again following the caller’s instructions, Summers had another employee watch Ogborn when she had to leave the office to check the restaurant. The first employee, 27 year old Jason Bradley, whom she asked to stay there refused to after he was on the phone with the caller, so she phoned her fiance Walter Nix, asking him to come in to ‘help’ with the situation. [10]

According to Ogborn, after Summers passed off the phone to Nix, he continued to do as the caller told, even as the caller’s requests became progressively more bizarre. A security camera recorded Nix forcing Ogborn to remove her apron, the only article of clothing she was still wearing, and to assume degrading positions, such as standing on a chair and getting on all fours. When Ogborn refused to obey the caller’s instructions, Nix hits the 90 lb Ogborn on the buttocks several times creating painful red welts, and at one point he does this for 10 minutes. At the caller’s request, Nix then threatens to beat Ogborn again and forces Ogborn to kiss him and then perform oral sex on him. Ogborn says at the point of sexual assault she was scarred for life.[11] The tape showed that Summers re-entered the office several times and dismissed Ogborn’s pleas for help, a statement which Summers denies.

When another employee was asked to take part and objected, Summers decided to call the store manager, whom the caller claimed to have on another phone line. She then discovered that the store manager had not spoken to any police officers, and that the call had been a hoax. A quick-thinking employee dialed *69 to determine that the caller had called from a supermarket pay phone in Panama City, Florida. Summers then called police, who arrested Nix and began an investigation to find the caller. [/quote]
The above scenario is really sick and hard to believe that something like that could happen, mush less that similar circumstances happened at least 70 times prior to this incident, but it’s true.

Other events show us that people are willing to kill upon request, even innocent woman, children and the elderly, while others are not.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHk4TGWx0ZM

[quote]
the My Lai massacre where the US army in Vietnam slaughtered 500 unarmed civilians, many women and children.

Some victims were sexually abused, beaten, tortured, maimed and mutilated.

Three U.S. servicemen who made an effort to halt the massacre and protect the wounded were sharply criticized by US Congressmen, received hate mail, death threats and mutilated animals on their doorsteps. Only 30 years after the event were their efforts honored.

American media first claimed 100 had been killed in a fierce fire fight.
[/quote]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre

[quote]
Charlie Company landed following a short artillery and helicopter gunship preparation. The soldiers found no enemy fighters in the village on the morning of March 16. Many suspected there were NLF troops in the village, hiding underground in the homes of their elderly parents or their wives. The U.S. soldiers, one platoon of which was led by Second Lieutenant William Calley, went in shooting at “suspected enemy position”. After the first civilians were killed and wounded by the indiscriminate fire, the soldiers soon began attacking anything that moved, humans and animals alike, with firearms, grenades and bayonets. The scale of the massacre only spiraled as it progressed, the brutality increasing with each killing. BBC News described the scene:

“ Soldiers went berserk, gunning down unarmed men, women, children and babies. Families which huddled together for safety in huts or bunkers were shown no mercy. Those who emerged with hands held high were murdered. … Elsewhere in the village, other atrocities were in progress. Women were gang raped; Vietnamese who had bowed to greet the Americans were beaten with fists and tortured, clubbed with rifle butts and stabbed with bayonets. Some victims were mutilated with the signature “C Company” carved into the chest. By late morning word had got back to higher authorities and a cease-fire was ordered. My Lai was in a state of carnage. Bodies were strewn through the village.[12] ”

More victims at My Lai. Photo by Ronald L. HaeberleDozens of people were herded into an irrigation ditch and other locations and killed with automatic weapons[13]. A large group of about 70 to 80 villagers, rounded up by the 1st Platoon in the center of the village, were killed personally by Calley and by soldiers he had ordered to fire. Calley also shot two other large groups of civilians with a weapon taken from a soldier who had refused to do any further killing.

Members of the 2nd Platoon killed at least 60-70 Vietnamese men, women, and children, as they swept through the northern half of My Lai 4 and through Binh Tay, a small subhamlet about 400 meters north of My Lai 4.[1]

After the initial “sweeps” by the 1st and the 2nd Platoons, the 3rd Platoon was dispatched to deal with any “remaining resistance”. They immediately began killing every still-living human and animal they could find, including shooting the Vietnamese who emerged from their hiding places, and finishing off the wounded found moaning in the heaps of bodies. The 3rd Platoon also rounded up and killed a group of 7 to 12 women and children.[1]

Since Charlie Company had encountered no enemy opposition, 4th Battalion, 3rd Infantry Regiment, was moved into its landing zone between and attacked the subhamlet of My Khe 4, killing as many as 90 people. U.S. forces lost one man killed and seven wounded from mines and booby traps.[1] During the next two days, both battalions were involved in additional burning and destruction of dwellings, and in the mistreatment of Vietnamese detainees.

Most of the soldiers had not participated in the crimes, but neither did they protest or complain to their superiors.[14]
[/quote]



At the end of the day what can really be said about these incidents are occurrences? Why are some people driven by a higher authority, a greater code of conduct than others? Why are some not willing to go along with this, when others just fall in line, or stand helplessly by and let these atrocities happen? Why do some decline to become Informants for the system while others just accept? Why do some just go along with injustice and corruption, while others turn away from all appearances of evil?
Why do some question, while others don’t?

There are a variety of reasons, many people are culturally engineered or programed to obey authority, many have never been in a similar situation before and their survival instinct is to comply, because everyone else is going along with it. Humans for the most part are social creatures and very few have the capacity to stand on their own, or be excluded from society, friends, family, neighbours and if the corruption, or atrocity is systemic, most will just fall in line with what is happening, just like in Nazi Germany.

When gangstalking takes to the air




Sensational new allegations of massive offshore tax evasion and money laundering in the Carroll Foundation Trust and parallel Carroll Maryland Trust cases is understood to have prompted well seasoned political observers in Washington to remark that these startling further insights in the combined Carroll Trusts is believed to be providing further ammunition to the Obama White House and Congressional leaders surrounding the much sought after deficit reduction programme. Tax evasion white collar organized crime and drug cartels related activities are now regarded in Washington as a clear and present danger to the economic national security interests of the United States of America. The Carroll Maryland Trust has it's foundations in Annapolis Maryland which is the crucible and center of excellence for the world renowned US Naval Academy situated close to Carroll House. The US Air Force is known to have had a close association with the Carroll Trust through the Howard Hughes Aircraft empire which was responsible for the design inception and manufacturing of the iconic AH-64 Apache and AH-6 attack helicopters with an aviation pedigree going back to the 1930's.

In a further amazing twist it is understood that the new files have also revealed that the Carroll Trust is connected to the late billionaire Howard Hughes estate which follows on from recent disclosures in the international media that the reclusive Howard Hughes occupied a Bel Air mansion in Los Angeles at 10001 Bel Air Road thought to be close to the Carroll Trust's former Californian Bel Air estate and Maryland interests. Los Angeles observers have confirmed that these further insights are now fueling speculation that the Hughes Carroll estate interests could be much larger than presently declared.

Californian close observers have remarked that the Carroll Foundation Trust US lawyers Loeb & Loeb who are based in Los Angeles are believed to be continuing to refuse to issue a public statement of clarification following these serious criminal allegations which now confront named partners of the firm surrounding the staggering criminal liquidation and embezzlement of the Carroll Foundation's empire. The US Attorney General Eric Holder is now also known to be deeply concerned with this national security public interests issue which is known to be held within a complete lock-down at the FBI Washington DC field office and the Metropolitan Police Scotland Yard London under the supervision of the Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe who is believed to have an intimate knowledge of this affair.

International News Networks:
http://usattackhelicopters.blogspot.co.uk/
Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=090_1341104371#SFd1Jk7pIE62AgwF.99


Newest addition to McClellan-Palomar

Night time military gunship gangstalker of civilians on American soil out of McClellan-Palomar

From above, Obedience to authority
. . .
Other events show us that people are willing to kill upon request, even innocent woman, children and the elderly, while others are not.
. . .
At the end of the day what can really be said about these incidents are occurrences? Why are some people driven by a higher authority, a greater code of conduct than others? Why are some not willing to go along with this, when others just fall in line, or stand helplessly by and let these atrocities happen? Why do some decline to become Informants for the system while others just accept? Why do some just go along with injustice and corruption, while others turn away from all appearances of evil?
Why do some question, while others don’t?

There are a variety of reasons, many people are culturally engineered or programed to obey authority, many have never been in a similar situation before and their survival instinct is to comply, because everyone else is going along with it. Humans for the most part are social creatures and very few have the capacity to stand on their own, or be excluded from society, friends, family, neighbours and if the corruption, or atrocity is systemic, most will just fall in line with what is happening, just like in Nazi Germany.