Rumors are circulating on the Internet that a second 9/11 is expected between September 14 and 21, 2007.
If it occurs, I profoundly hope that America won't be "fooled twice." Instead, I hope the American people rise up against this second massacre and join in a general strike.
I hope the many military men and women who respect the Constitution and oppose this administration will remove the administration from office.
Let the People choose a new government with no thoughts of a foolish war on Iran, one that will end the unjust war in Iraq and bring the criminals in the administration to justice for their acts of mass murder and high treason.
To help us understand what events have led us to fear a second 9/11, I offer this partial chronology.
Many events are missing, the most obvious being the executive orders the President has signed and recent legislation passed. I must leave these topics to others for lack of time.
February 2007.Commondreams reports that Admiral William Fallon, President George W. Bush’s nominee to head Central Command (CENTCOM), expressed strong opposition in February to an administration plan to increase the number of carrier strike groups in the Persian Gulf from two to three and vowed privately there would be no war against Iran as long as he was chief of CENTCOM. Fallon’s resistance to the proposed deployment of a third aircraft carrier is credited with shifting the Bush administration’s Iran policy in February and March away from increased military threats and toward diplomatic engagement with Iran.
A source who met privately with Fallon around the time of his confirmation hearing and who insists on anonymity quoted Fallon as saying that an attack on Iran “will not happen on my watch”.
Asked how he could be sure, Fallon is reported to have replied, “You know what choices I have. I’m a professional.”Fallon said that he was not alone, according to the source, adding, “There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box.” (1)
1 Feb. 2007. Zbigniew Brzezinski warns the Senate Foreign Relations Committee of ongoing machinations designed to produce war with Iran and more: “A plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks, followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure; then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the US blamed on Iran; culminating in a ‘defensive’ US action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.” Over the past half year, events have followed Brzezinski’s scenario closely. (2) (My emphasis.)
25 Feb. 2007. The London Sunday Times reports that some of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defence and intelligence sources. The newspaper learned that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack. … A source with close ties to British intelligence is reported to have said: “There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible.”
A British defense source confirmed that there were deep misgivings inside the Pentagon about a military strike. “All the generals are perfectly clear that they don’t have the military capacity to take Iran on in any meaningful fashion. Nobody wants to do it and it would be a matter of conscience for them.
“There are enough people who feel this would be an error of judgment too far for there to be resignations.”
A generals’ revolt on such a scale would be unprecedented, the Sunday Times said. “American generals usually stay and fight until they get fired,” added a Pentagon source. Robert Gates, the Defense Secretary, has repeatedly warned against striking Iran and is believed to represent the view of his senior commanders.
One retired general who participated in the “generals’ revolt” against Donald Rumsfeld’s handling of the Iraq war said he hoped his former colleagues would resign in the event of an order to attack. (3)
25 Feb. 2007. In the same article, the Sunday Times quotes General Peter Pace, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, as saying that there was “zero chance” of a war with Iran. He played down claims by US intelligence that the Iranian government was responsible for supplying insurgents in Iraq with sophisticated roadside bombs, forcing Bush on the defensive over some of the allegations.
Remember that so called mistake flight that flew atomic weapons over the US on its way to Louisiana? And it became a mistake, because someone reported it. All we know Cheney is cooking up his own suitcase bomb, to give to some radical they picked up from Iran on a rendition flight, and tell him to go to some city in the USA and detonate it. That would be our 2nd 911, and do you think we are going to point the blame at Cheney or Bush?
It is pretty clear to see what city they would not explode it in. Certainly not the Midwest, or in the South. I don't think they will target the Western States either. California is probably off the list because Bush caters to the Spanish crowd, and Bush is really pro immigrant amnesty. California is a food basket growing region. Which leaves where? Chicago, but that would affect Detroit the auto manufacturers wouldn't it? They have New York again, except they won't hit the trade towers again, but wouldn't that be a juicy spot? The insurance has to be much more than the old towers, that is do they have the New Freedom Tower Constructed yet? Probably not.
But they do have Wall Street to blast apart, New Jersey, Maryland, Boston Mass, Scranton Pennsylvania, Albany, but maybe they will do Detroit. Hell it is a drug infested haven, and we are not going to be getting oil out of Iran or Iraq for a while. This will force Wall Street to put money into the renewable energy sector. It will help our pal Senator Grassley. Your guess is as good as mine.
I think Chicago. Perfect spot, to get a terrorist in. He can cut across from Canada. We'll blame the Canadians for unsecure borders. Everyone will understand because most of our money went to secure the border South to keep the Mexicans out. Lots of trucks go in there. We can ship the Acase up with a trucker, where our friend can pick it up at Dunkin Donuts, jump in a taxi and go to downtown Chicago. Hey Happy New Year, and the fire works begin with Iran.
They have all the military behind him. And they are not going to let this time frame slip by I think. Cheney wants to conquer Iran before he dies, and Bush is the guy to help them realize their dreams. damn Iranian terrorists.
Chicago will be a mushroom, lots of work available to get the people back on their feet. New Auto plants will be built for renewable energy, this way the renewable energy crowd will not cause a stir because we are trying to help the environment. This will open the way for us to start drilling in Anwar Alaska to use the Oil to rebuild Chicago and when that runs out, things will be settled down in Iraq and Iran to take their Oil. Good plan!
Well America can then go attack Iran now. The Middle East region will become a nuclear zone like Japan was, and most of the fighting will stop across the region. The USA had to shoot themselves in the foot, so Russia, France, and other Superpowers will not stand in their way when the US applies it justice. After all Iranian intent to get Atomic weapons in this administrations eyes is the same as using them, and now their damn terrorist has attacked Chicago! They only needed a small bomb to attack us. We can blame the liberals for getting in the way, and not allowing us to preemptively strike Iran when we had the chance. But its to late. Chicago is in ruins.
It will be a major rerun of 911 with a much greater disaster. The generals will all rally the President and Airforce units and Aircraft Carriers will shock and awe Iran with nukes until we ask everyone in the country what did you do? I ran!
by
Dom Jermano (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 40 diaries, 930 comments)
on Sunday, September 16, 2007 at 7:27:45 AM
Well, Larry Silverstein did recently buy the Sears Tower so that would support your theory of Chicago being the next target. There is also Portland, during Operation Noble Resolve, but that is in October and the market money is betting on before Sept. 21.
Now we have the sixth nuke to track down from the B52.
How bizarre to being discussing this! Thousands, if not millions, of people could die or be harmed if a nuke is set off in an American city. Why isn't anyone with any influence doing something about it???
by
Steve Beckow (18 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 46 comments)
on Sunday, September 16, 2007 at 1:01:48 PM
I missed the possibility, but my wife pointed it out.
Maybe the object of buying the put options was actually to LOSE the money and feed it into the market to help prop it up a bit?
I know, I'm just grasping at straws, since I do believe Portland (or Eugene, slightly to the south) is a likely target for a false flag nuke attack. Though I was "happy" to hear that Silverstein bought the Sears Tower, as that gives Chicago a definite edge.
by
Charlie L (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 715 comments)
on Monday, September 17, 2007 at 12:25:18 AM
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
