So I was told by one well-known Yemeni security analyst that the vast majority of Ansar al-Sharia are angry tribesmen, not AQAP [Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, of which Yemen occupies the SW portion], and that they're operating out of revenge and they're operating out of a sense that the state is done and that they need to build one in their own vision of Islamic Sharia law, which can bring order in chaos. That's, essentially, their selling point. We'll give you bread. We'll give you electricity, and we'll give you law and order.
I think that we're encouraging the very threats that we claim to be fighting, because WE'RE GIVING PEOPLE LEGITIMATE AGENDA OR REASON - MOTIVATION - TO FIGHT THE UNITED STATES. When people have the perception that they are under attack they bond together and I think that that's what we are doing right now.
I am stunned by the number of people that I know within both the special operations community and the intelligence community who are saying I think that our policy is failing in Yemen. [Actually, it's succeeding.]
GROSS: Who is creating the policy in Yemen? Is that coming directly from the White House or the CIA, the military? Like who?
SCAHILL: You know, I think - I mean the honest answer is I don't know, but my best sense from the reporting that I've done and the analysis that I've heard from people within government and military, is that John Brennan is the chief driver of U.S. policy toward Yemen. [He is also a key proponent of "enhanced interrogation."] Of course, he, when he was in the CIA, was in Saudi Arabia [which was involved in the 9/11 attacks]. He spent a tremendous amount of time working on Saudi and Yemeni issues in the intelligence community and in government. [In other words, Brennan is a US terrorism controller, working with terrorism controllers "on the other side." He makes a public appearance now and then to give his image a fresh coat of whitewash.]from Why The U.S. Is Aggressively Targeting Yemen
Jeremy Scahill, one of the few reporters who has spent time investigating the situation in Yemen, was interviewed on May 17th, 2012 on NPR's Fresh Air program. I read over the transcript, and soon realized that the situation in Yemen, as I suspected, is more of the same old "war on terror" - i.e. the Satanist faction of the US provoking Yemeni civilians into opposing Yemen's British-puppet government, declaring them to be "Al Qaeda militants," attacking them, and thus continuing the cycle of violence which ends only when the country is reduced to rubble.
Also as I indicated in a recent post on the situation there, the "underwear bomb plot" was evidently choreographed by British intelligence in order to "justify" the sudden increase in activity there, which is actually just timed to give a new batch of budding "wizards" the opportunity to go on an advanced-SRA spree at a time and in a location most likely to "give them magical powers," i.e. give their souls TO "magical powers."
Another purpose of this front in the "war on terror" is to demolish the economy there, and to prevent the construction of the colossal Bridge of the Horns (which some think is a fantasy, although LPAC evidently considers it to be feasible), which is just coincidentally a section of the Eurasian Land-Bridge, the basis for a real global economic recovery. Perhaps it's feasible, and perhaps it was planned in order to be prevented only by the "war on terror," as a hint that the "war on terror" is partly a war on the Eurasian Land-Bridge.
Below, I summarize and interpret portions of the interview:
A) Drone strikes have been killing many civilians, provoking them to join a Taliban-like group (probably run by Saudi intelligence, which is a front for British intelligence and which according to Scahill provides intelligence on Yemen to the US, meaning that the British are running the conflict in Yemen), which has appeared in their midst, interestingly since the US planted "trainers" in Yemen to supposedly train Yemeni forces to fight terrorism. I surmise that this was part of setting the stage for the planned "war."
B) Scahill: "In fact, one Yemeni tribal leader, Terry, told me: How is it that I can go and see Wuhayshi, THE LEADER OF AQAP, SITTING IN A RESTAURANT IN SHABWAH PROVINCE, AND NO ONE DRONE-STRIKES HIM, BUT YOU HIT A VILLAGE FULL OF BEDOUINS THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH AL-QAIDA? LIKE, WHO'S GIVING YOU YOUR TARGET LISTS? AND I HEARD THAT OVER AND OVER." [emphasis added]
D) The U.S. created a "counterterrorism" unit in Yemen made up of Yemeni soldiers. (The "counter" in "counterterrorism" is to be understood by converting it to its numerical equivalent, i.e. 96, i.e. 666.) But this "counterterrorism" unit ended up waging terrorism on the population at the behest of the British-puppet government, not attacking Al Qaeda. It's the same old story: "misdirected" terror vs. "misdirected" terror, where innocents are crushed between "two sides" who are supposedly fighting each other. This is part of what caused many Yemenis, backed into a corner, to align themselves with the Taliban-like "terrorist" organization run by British-Saudi intelligence, against the British-puppet government.
E) There's a fairly long section on a US cruise missile attack which killed about 50 civilians, and which the US tried to portray as a Yemeni attack. This attack marked the beginning of a three-year outbreak of violence involving the US-trained Yemeni "counter-terrorist" forces, the main victims of which were Yemeni civilians who had been provoked into joining the aforementioned Taliban-like organization. This has been thoroughly exposed, yet there has been no investigation by British robot Nerobama, or Congress, and those responsible have of course not been held responsible. Just as in the Daniel Chong incident, their script-writers dictate "reality," and their responses to it. It's not in the script, so it's as if it never happened. So, this US massacre remains the fault of Yemen's government, and the deliberate torture of Daniel Chong remains an "accident" caused by "poorly designed procedures."
F) The government of Yemen, which was ostensibly at war with terrorists, at times assisted terrorists in order to receive more anti-terrorist funding from the US. My take on this is that it's one of the ways this "war" is being choreographed to keep it going.