Embrace Foundation is a non-profit,  
educational foundation set up to create  
better understanding between people of  
different religions, cultures, traditions and  
world philosophies.

Embrace Foundation works to bring leaders  
and scholars of world-wide religions,  
cultures and philosophies together by  
sponsoring forums, seminars, lectures and  
developing an international exchange  
program. Embrace Foundation is particularly  
concerned with reaching the world public  
through the media.
Embrace Foundation is an all volunteer  
organization. All donations go directly to  

Embrace Foundation does not and has  
never given permission to any outside  
organization to solicit or receive  
contributions on our behalf.

All donations should be made to Embrace  
Foundation only via Paypal or by mail. All  
donations are tax deductible. A receipt will  
be emailed to you. Please click on the Pay  
Pal link below to Donate.
Travel As An Interfaith Act
Embrace encourages all who can do so, to  
learn about other traditions and cultures by  
traveling as “Grassroots Diplomats.” We  
hope that people every where become life  
long students of our world-wide humanity.

“ In every man there is something wherein I  
may learn of him, and in that I am his pupil.”
Embrace Humanity

Great Visions - TV
Guests are: Swami Satchidananda &
the Rt. Reverend Dean Parks Morton
Embrace Archives
Limited Editions Gallery
Umrah - Jordan
Embrace Sacred Places
Monastery of Bahira - Syria
Embrace Foundation Universal
Monk Reading - Ethiopia
Thank you for making a donation.
Embrace Foundation Archives.Org
Virginia (Embrace), Dr.Anwar Barkat (World Council of Churches, UN) & Imam I.H. Kauser
Embrace Foundation Archives. Org
Embrace Archives
NEW !  See: TRAVELING IN MOROCCO 2020 article with many photos in CELEBRATE HUMANITY - A Practice of Renewed Hope For All People - SEE: EmbraceFoundationUniversal.Org   -   SEE: Homeless Man creates huge bookstore in Athens, run only by people without homes ABOUT BOOKS - News - EmbraceFoundationUniversal.Org - SEE: Conference in New Delhi - Muslims Celebrate Their Diversity encouraged by the Dalai Lama who is asked to participate - in FOCUS   -   SEE: Bulletin for Newest Update! - VISIT: EmbraceSacredPlaces.Org now with 10,000 Photos!  - New! Traveling in Azerbaijan in CELEBRATE HUMANITY  - SEE: New! Traveling in Lebanon 2018 and Traveling in Georgia in CELEBRATE HUMANITY - NEW! See: TRAVELING  IN CYPRUS in CELEBRATE HUMANITY - FINALLY ! - See: CURRENT The Embrace Founders Travels in Azerbaijan, Turkey, Georgia, Lebanon & Cyprus  -   IMPORTANT ! See: article of TRAVELING IN TURKEY in CELEBRATE HUMANITY
Embrace Foundation International



10 Secret Armies of the Central Intelligence Agency

Langley, Virginia (TFC) - As more and more evidence mounts that the US government was secretly assisting the Islamic  
State, it might be time to point out a few instances when the Central Intelligence Agency created secret armies. The current  
theory suggests the US secretly supported the Islamic State so the Islamists would destabilize the government of Syrian  
President Assad. If that seems out of the question, remember the CIA once started a war over bananas… literal bananas.

Cuba: Probably the best known secret army. Castro nationalized the assets of western companies after his government  
took power, so the US decided to overthrow the government of Cuba and install a puppet regime. As with most of the  
armies backed by the US intelligence establishment, it failed. Miserably. The Bay of Pigs invasion saw 1400 US-trained  
Cubans surrender to Castro’s forces within 24 hours.

El Salvador: The US-supported Salvadoran government faced opposition from communist rebels. US intelligence saw an  
obvious and simple answer: establish death squads. US intelligence trained and advised pro-government forces as they  
massacred villages and led the way to the displacement of over a million people. Immediately after the ceasefire, there was  
a general amnesty for people implicated in war crimes. This amnesty was ruled to be illegal, but remains in effect anyway.  
Those seeking justice are often burglarized and the evidence of CIA involvement is stolen.

Afghanistan: The US armed and trained the Mujaheddin fighters through Operation Cyclone. Later, many of these fighters  
would form the core of the fundamentalist Islamic terrorist groups we are fighting (or possibly supporting) today. Yes,  
Osama bin Laden was one of the fighters trained by the CIA in Afghanistan. The whole operation was carried out to stop the  
Soviet invasion.

Guatemala: This little CIA caper is the origin of the term “Banana Republic.” The democratically elected President of  
Guatemala decided to punish the United Fruit Company for decades of consorting with the country’s dictators. He began to  
propose legislation to end the US multinational’s monopoly on almost everything in the country. So what else could the CIA  
do? The agency overthrew the legal government and triggered a war… over bananas.

Congo: In the 1960s, Belgium was ending its colonial rule over Congo. Rather than allow self-determination, the CIA staged  
assassinations, armed rebel forces, brought in European mercenaries, and even backed them up with a secret air force.

Nicaragua (the second time): In the 1980s, the leftist Sandinistas took power. The CIA backed the Contra militia that  
opposed them. The agency funneled them arms, ran cocaine for them, and trained the organization that become well  
known for child soldiers, massacres at literacy centers, and war crimes of just about every imaginable kind.

Angola: The CIA hired French and South African mercenaries to assist right-wing groups in their fight against the Popular  
Movement for the Liberation of Angola. The group was competing with several other paramilitary organizations in a fight to  
take over the country after the Portuguese decolonized. The CIA’s mercenary army predictably lost.

Ukraine (the first time): During the second World War, the Nazis set up a partisan group in Ukraine to harass and slow the  
advancing Soviet forces. At the end of World War II, US intelligence began funding and assisting the partisan group. The  
Soviets wiped the partisans out in 1952.

Venezuela: In 2002, a group within Venezuela attempted to oust the government. The US flatly denied involvement. Of  
course, there is more than enough evidence to tie the Bush Administration to the plot. There is even circumstantial  
evidence a more recent second attempt.

Ukraine (the second time): The most recent revolution in Ukraine may have started organically, however, it was seized  
upon by US intelligence. The revolution became just another method of installing a US puppet regime. The US chose to  
install literal Nazis. These facts are largely ignored by US media.

Would US intelligence secretly back a brutal, murderous paramilitary group to destabilize a country on the US hit list? Of  
course. The US intelligence apparatus has been doing it for about 60 years.

By Justin King
The Fifth Column
February 18, 2016

The Impending Dangers of a Global Conflict:
How to Prevent World War III
The Lessons of History

By Prof. Vyacheslav Dashichev (Translated from Russian)

All indications suggest that the international community is once again  entering a period of increasing risk of war. It is no  
coincidence that Western  political analysts are writing about it more often. In June 2011, a book by  Prof. Michel  
Chossudovsky was released: “Towards A Third World War III  Scenario”.Even among Russian analysts there are   
increased concerns about the fate of the world, for example, the article by Yuri  Krupnov: “The general trend is clear: The  
West needs a major war.” After the  shameful war of NATO against Libya, the U.S. and Israel are increasingly  threatening  
to take action against the Iranian military. Many see in this the  risk of bringing about another major war.

Is there good reason for such an alarming outlook? Let us not forget how  in the past the world slipped into major world  

Are there any analogies which relate to the present? We now live in a new  era of nuclear-armed missiles in which fighting  
a war using such weapons is no  longer a rational option to achieve political goals simply because the attacking  side risks  
receiving a crushing blow as a response.

However, is it reasonable today to rely on our statesmen to carry out their  policy decisions rationally? The same old failings  
apply equally to them:  stupidity, selfishness and egoism, wanting to outdo their opponents, to dominate  and exploit others.

What was decisive in triggering the world wars of the 20th Century compared  to today’s situation? In a four-volume book  
“Hitler’s strategy - recipe for  disaster” I investigated the causes of this misfortune for mankind. In it I  name 7 factors:

1) The actions of the expanding German empire - which freely admitted their  intentions - was to obtain regional and then  
global domination and to gain  control of the resources and markets of the world. In a meeting at his  headquarters in 1940  
Hitler said: “Today we are fighting for oil reserves,  rubber, mineral resources, etc.” In 1941, two days before the attack on  
the  Soviet Union, Hitler signed Directive No. 32 “Preparing for the period after the  completion of Operation Barbarossa” in  
which he went over plans for defeating  the USA and Britain and following that world domination.

2) The expansionist German Reich wanted to achieve military superiority by  massive rearmament.

3) The goal of the German Reich was to upset the balance of power in the  world arena by defeating small and medium-
sized countries and thereby increasing  its geopolitical space in its struggle for world domination. This involved the   
annexation of Austria and the taking of Sudetenland and then Czechoslovakia. The  attack on Poland led them to the point  
of critical mass in the change of balance  of power. Britain and France could not let that happen so they declared war on   
Germany. Thus, began the second World War.

4) Merging the countries into a coalition whose individual national interests  and sovereignty were threatened by the  
expansionist state. In the scheme of  international relations there is a principle known as defensive reaction. This  states  
that a potential counterbalance of forces is created that acts against  the state that adopts a policy of domination, violence  
or the desire to rule  over other peoples and nations by imposing his values by force. In the first  World War it was Entente,  
and in the second the anti-Hitler coalition that acted  as a counterbalance.

5) Within the innermost circle of the power elite in an expansionist state a  power structure comes into being that is  
concentrated into one single person.  Fateful decisions over war and peace are made by one or only a few persons.

6) The expansionist state seeks to resist the economic and systemic crisis of  capitalism. The solution is to go to war. In a  
meeting with the generals in  1939, Hitler said: Either we declare war, or Germany will be confronted with a  deep economic  

7) Propaganda is used to systematically implant the notion of an enemy in the  minds of the population. The enemy are the  
peoples of the countries against  which the attack is being prepared.

Both world wars started in Europe and then encroached onto other regions of  the world. In particular, it should be noted  
that the expansionist state  intending to gain power by declaring war, each time has made a fatal mistake in  assessing its  
own forces, that is the moral, spiritual and material requirements  to achieve the set goal. In this case Germany grossly  
violated the law  formulated by Clausewitz which states that the political objectives should be  strictly in accordance with  
material resources and international conditions. For  that reason in two world wars the expansionist state of Germany  
suffered severe  defeat, and the German people experienced two national catastrophes.

The same fatal error of setting foreign policy tasks that in no way were in  accordance with the available resources was  
made by the Soviet authorities after  the second World War. Stalin, who always decided alone over the fate of his  country,  
believed that after the outstanding victory over fascism, he could  easily install Soviet domination over Eastern and Central  

After he had  brought the countries of this region under Soviet control he grossly violated  the balance of power in Europe  
and caused a defensive reaction in the countries  of Western Europe. He provoked the Cold War which hung like an  
intolerable  burden over the Soviet Union, its economy and its population. It is one of the  main reasons for the collapse of  
the Soviet Union. And that’s not all. The  country was condemned to a struggle with a coalition that had far greater   
resources. In addition, it also permitted the USA, as guarantor and defender and  leading force in the West, to set up  
American domination over Western Europe -  and, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, also over the eastern part of   

Since the days of the Cold War with the world divided between the two  superpowers - the USA and the Soviet Union, both  
of which were nuclear powers  struggling for supremacy - there was a balance of nuclear fear. This kept both  powers from  
taking undue risks which forced them to take measures to avoid a  war. They also signed a series of agreements on the  
mutual limitation of nuclear  weapons and restraint in their further development. However, this did not mean  the end of the  
struggle between the superpowers. The US has shifted its focus on  information and economic warfare and secret acts of  
sabotage (subversive  activities). A pro-American lobby was setup in the Soviet Union. This lobby paid  bribes and recruited  
representatives of political parties and the state  apparatus to work for it. All this is the strategy - developed by Liddell  Hart -  
of indirect measures to destroy the enemy and seize territory without  using military forces. This strategy played a very  
important role in organizing  the state putsch in December 1991. One of the main goals of American  policy was to bring  
about the downfall of the Soviet Union and it was the  establishment of capitalism in the post-Soviet sphere of influence that  
served  as the best method of bringing down Russia in all spheres, but especially the  economy.

At the time of the Soviet reforms in the 80’s new foundations were developed  in Soviet foreign policy which permitted a  
series of agreements at the end of  the Cold War and the establishment of a new peace accord in Europe to be agreed   
with the West. On 21.11.1990 the Paris Charter had been signed by all European  countries, the USA and Canada. It  
declared that the era of confrontation was  over. “We proclaim that in future our relations will be based on respect and   
cooperation.” It was proclaimed: “Europe free yourself from the legacy of the  past.

A new era of democracy, peace and unity approaches.” In the Charter  magnificent goals and standards of international  
coexistence were declared to  strengthen security and confidence among all countries, to encourage  disarmament, and  
that political consultations be intensified in order to solve  economic, social, ecological, cultural and humanitarian problems.  
Peace should  emanate from Europe. Europe must be open to all countries and cooperate with all  countries in order to  
solve current and future problems.

The importance of the OSCE should be strengthened and its 10 principles  should be followed strictly.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union all these wonderful formulations were  thrown out since they no longer suited the  
interests of the United States. Now  the United States was the pre-eminent power in a unipolar world order and did  not  
resist the temptation to exploit its advantage to expand its sphere of  influence, to impose its will and values, and to  
dominate all the world’s  resources. For the world this policy has brought a greater threat than that of  the East-West  

1) The US is clearly an expanding state. The goal of US global politics was  developed with unique clarity in the Project for  
the New American Century (PNAC  1997) by Cheney (Vice President), Rumsfeld (defense secretary) et al.

That means world domination in the sense of American principles and values:  “We need to accept responsibility for  
America’s unique role in preserving and  extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and  our  
principles.” These provisions were developed further in the following  program documents of the US administration.

2) In order to achieve and maintain world domination the project envisaged  the unprecedented American expansion of  
military force: “We must increase our  military spending significantly if we want to accept global responsibility, and  attain  
the future military strength required.” Today military spending amounts  to nearly $700 billion. That’s nearly half the military  
spending of the entire  world. That’s significantly more than the military spending at the peak of the  Cold War.

The aim of the US is global military dominance including missile defense, so  that Russia will lose its ability to respond  
militarily, and thereby will no  longer be in a position to offer resistance to military and political threats.  American authors  
openly discuss this (Note 2: the Pentagon).

3) The US has set as its goal to decisively reset the balance of power  worldwide to its advantage. They broaden their  
geopolitical space to maintain  their position of world domination as well as their access to the energy and  natural  
resources of world markets. They do this by waging wars against  individual states and building up a network of military  
bases. Since the  collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States has waged war against  Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq and  
Libya and gained control over many other  countries without carrying out military actions. The American military is now in   
over 130 countries. Europe has long been under American rule and today it has  40,000 men under arms in Germany,  
including nuclear weapons. These troops are  not only an instrument of American domination in Europe but also serve to  
assert American interests in other regions of the world.

4) The American policy of dominance has generated strong anti-American  sentiments around the world as a consequence  
of the principle known as a  defensive reaction. But till now it has not developed to the point that an  anti-US coalition of  
states has come into being, namely those countries against  which the United States wants to impose its will. One  
explanation is that the  political elites of Western countries were forced to accept the US dictates of  the Cold War in order  
to protect themselves from Stalin’s expansion. Today they  are still free-riding the coat-tails of American policy in order to  
gain certain  advantages. But in the consciousness of European countries other sentiments are  awakening.

People are not willed to accept that the United States is treating them like  satellites and exploiting them in its global military  
affairs. A famous German  politician Egon Bahr once made a well-known comment: “No people can live  continuously on its  
knees”. If the US does not stop with its politics of  domination an anti-American coalition can be expected.

5) In the United States a small secret inner circle decides over war and  peace. To it belong some of the richest families.  
Even Brzezinski in a speech on  October 14 showed a major concern because most of today’s Congressmen and   
Senators as well as most of the top officials belong in the category of very  rich, the so-called top 1% and only a small part  
of them decide on US  policy.


6) We are now faced with finding a way out of the largest financial, economic  and moral crisis since 1929/33 which has  
shaken capitalist society and the  social structure of US society and has now taken hold of the whole world.  Therefore,  
there is the danger that American leaders pursue the dangerous path  of war, for example, a war against Iran. In this way  
they could try to attain  their geopolitical goals. In this age of globalization a medium scale war could  very rapidly develop  
into a world war. However, this does not restrain the US  power elite because there are enough of them who believe that it  
is time to get  rid of a few billion unnecessary citizens of the world.

7) As far as propaganda, psychological control and the motivation of American  politics of predominance and the creation of  
enemy stereotypes are concerned the  US power elites have surpassed all previous records. Here we see that there is   
much in common with the factors leading to the world wars of the 20th. Century  and the trends of today’s American  
politics. This is also true in respect of the  tendency of overestimating one’s own forces in the effort to secure global   
predominance. The overextension of the US in its imperial efforts constitutes  one of the main reasons for today’s financial  
crisis and the accumulation of  huge public debts. American hegemony is approaching its own demise.

Washington has enriched the international lexicon of terminology with such  terms as: humanitarian war, preventive  
intervention, superior armaments, general  meaning of American values, US interests above all else, “if you’re not for us,   
you’re against us”, axis of evil, rogue state, checkbook diplomacy, selective  strikes, NATO globalization, closing vulnerable  
areas of the US with  anti-missile systems, etc. The new American military doctrine has given the US  the prerogative to  
conduct preventive wars.

What does the Russian leadership think of US policy and how does it respond  to the possible threat?

It is known that during the reign of Yeltsin an unusual state concept  prevailed according to which there was no longer an  
external threat to Russia  anymore. This concept was supported by Foreign Minister Kosirev. This concept  severely  
damaged Russian national interests and the country’s defense  capability.

Later foreign policy was weakened further, reminiscent of a policy of  reconciliation.

It is hard to see why the Russian leadership did not even once bring a  proposal warning against the dangers of the  
expansionist politics of the United  States, and American hegemony and tyranny in the world arena, which threatened  the  
world and Russia. There were several broad possibilities but they were not  utilized. It is remarkable that neither Yeltsin nor  
Putin nor Medvedev made an  appeal to the EU, to revive the good principles of the Paris Charter. They were  not even  
mentioned in official publications although they met the essential  national interests of Russia and other European  

Another example: In 2008 I put together a project for a convention to ban the  Politics of Global Dominance. The project was  
published and submitted to the  Russian Foreign Office with the proposal that it be put forward at the next UN  General  
“We, the United Nations member states, in recognizing that the quest for  global predominance in the 20th Century led to  
world wars, resulted in countless  victims, led to colossal losses of material wealth, the militarization of  society and  
people’s consciousness, the emergence of difficult-to-eradicate  enemy stereotypes, to post-war poverty, destruction,  
despair and the hardening  of human attitudes, the collapse of production and the decline in science. We  are aware that  
after each World War once again a large power center forms that  exercises an imperial and messianic rule threatening the  
national interests and  the freedom of the peoples of the world who must resist this by uniting in  opposition. In light of this  
and that in times of nuclear weapons and the space  age, a new world war resulting from the politics of global domination  
would lead  to the extinction of human civilization; in the firm conviction that the  politics of predominance always goes hand  
in hand with expansion and that it is  the most dangerous factor in international relations, also that it stands in  sharp  
contrast to the democratic principles of foreign policy and ignores  international principles such as “unity in diversity”, “live  
and let live”.  Therefore, the need is recognized to remove the material basis for the politics  of global predominance by  
restricting the military expenditures of all UN  members up to 0.5% of their gross domestic product.

We declare our resolution for an international ban on politics that has as  its goal the domination over other peoples and that  
such politics can be  described as a Crime against Humanity.”

This international convention could - in the event of its ratification by the  UN General Assembly - be an important threshold  
in the fight of the world  community against the politics of hegemony, of dictates and dangerous military  despotism in  
international relations. But this proposal for a convention  elicited no response from our politicians.

The Russian leadership could also start other important proposals to  consolidate the peace, for example:

•     Termination and complete prohibition of military competition which the US  forces on the world, and restriction of  
military budgets to 0.5% of GDP.

•      The dissolution of NATO as a relic of the Cold War in light of the fact that  Europe today is no longer under threat, and  
the conversion of the OECD into an  energetic principal organization for European and Euro-Atlantic cooperation.

•     The repatriation of 40,000 American and 20,000 British troops and nuclear  weapons from Germany.

•     Proposals against the building of American bases in Central Asia, the  Caucasus, the Black Sea and the Balkans.

•     Repatriation of NATO troops from Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Regarding the US missile defense system in Europe the Russian leadership has  long held an absurd position, and that of  
cooperation with the Americans in  building the system, although the system is directed solely against Russia.  Medvedev  
should have been taking a decisive step and effective measures against  the threat a lot sooner and not just before the  
Duma elections. This makes it  appear only as a campaign maneuver.

These and other proposals of Russian foreign policy could counter an increase  in the military threat. The Chief of General  
Staff of the Russian army, Makarov,  spoke about them before a public committee on 11 November 2011. But the   
proposals were not presented to the international organizations. One wonders  why?

Historical experience shows that those who sought to dominate Europe and the  world always encountered a fiasco. The  
same fate awaits the initiators and  perpetrators who build the American world empire. What is important is to  prevent a  
new world war being unleashed.

Prof. Vyacheslav Dashichev is a member of the Institute  of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS). Moscow 
This English translation was taken from Global Research.Org


Embrace Foundation Retreat Center
.Foundation (skype messaging)    -    011+1+212.675.4500 (New York)

Click to Email Us