1
1
Moreover, in The Way of the World (2008), Ron Suskind has explained how the White House had ordered the CIA to forge a back-dated and hand-written letter from the head of Iraqi intelligence to Saddam Hussein to create a false link between Saddam and al Qaeda as justification for the Iraq war “Book says White House ordered forgery"”, news.yahoo.com, August 5, 2008). So it turns out that fabricating incidents to justify wars is a routine activity in the Bush/Cheney administration. And they don’t take pains to cover it up.
They need torture to support their case for a fraudulent “war on terror”. They know that torture produces false confessions to pacify those conducting torture and are not valuable for obtaining “actionable intelligence”. But torture can be useful if, for example, you need fake confessions to support a phony war. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (“Tainted by Torture”, slate.com, May 14, 2008), the alleged mastermind of 9/11 as Osama’s director of operations, not only confessed to planning 9/11 but to 30 other attacks, some of which occurred while he was still a child and others after he was incarcerated. Maybe he was trying to tell us something.
McCain’s campaign situation has been so desperate that Bush/Cheney may be planning another domestic 9/11 about the time of the election. A recent S&P stock trading report from H. L. Camp and Company (August 7, 2008) predicts that an upcoming “crash of 2008” will follow an even more massive attack on US soil. Attributed to Juval Aviv, an Israeli “terrorist consultant” who is said to have accurately predicted the details of the 9/11 and 7/7 attacks, the next attack will come in a few months and involve suicide bombers in places that large numbers of people congregate, such as Disneyland, Las Vegas, New York, Chicago, and San Francisco.
It will be in shopping malls, subways at rush hour, train stations, football stadiums, and casinos. There will be simultaneous attacks at five to eight locations. Since this report originated on FOX NEWS (“U.S. Terror Attack – ‘Ninety Days at Most’,” July 13, 2008), there are reasons to question its reliability. But we can take it as a sign of the times that even a rumor as extraordinary as this one has to be taken seriously in the era of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. According to the report, the FBI and CIA are well aware of these plans, but the government is not saying anything to avoid frightening the public.
The US response will be to attack Syria and Iran before Bush leaves office. By telling us the CIA and FBI knows about these plans, Aviv appears to be hinting that this, like 9/11, will be another inside job. Some Americans might find this less incredible if they knew that Republican officials have been promoting the idea that another 9/11 would be good for Bush and good for the party for several years. Check out Capitol Hill Blue (November 12, 2006) or google “GOP welcomes new 9/11” (July 16, 2007). Consider:
* On June 3, 2007, Dennis Milligan, Chair of the Arkansas Republican Party, said, “I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [9/11]” to make the American people appreciate President Bush and thereby benefit the GOP (rawstory.com);
* On July 7, 2007, former Republican Senator Rick Santorum asserted that a series of “unfortunate events” (meaning “terrorist attacks”) will occur within the next year and radically alter American citizens' view of the war (prisonplanet.com);
* On July 8, 2007, Lt.. Col. Doug Delaney, Chair of the War Studies Program at the Royal Military College in Kingston, Ontario, suggested the West needs more terrorist attacks on the scale of 9/11 and 7/7 to save a failing foreign policy.
* On July 10, 2007, an anonymous U.S. intelligence analyst told the AP that “al-Qaida has rebuilt its operating capability to a level not seen since just before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks,” according to two AP reporters.
* On July 10, 2007, Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff made a major effort to convey to the public he has a “gut feeling” that a new 9/11 is on the way, a report that even drew the attention of The New York Times (“Chertoff Warns of Higher Risk Of Terrorism,” July 11, 2007, page A16).
This kind of saturation campaign involves disseminating the same or similar information through multiple sources in order to “soften the target” for the main event. This is a widespread technique of disinformation that insures that most of those in the target population will hear the story and will hear it from more than one source, which is reinforcing. In fact, the whole “terrorism” scenario is so amorphous that any act taken by anyone can be alleged to be the work of “terrorists,” which is perfect for our agents. In this case, they overplayed their hand and made it too obvious.
Indeed, on July 13, 2007, another alarming report appeared as an ABC News Exclusive, “Terror Commander: New Attack Will Dwarf Failed Bomb Plot.” This sequence appears to have been skillfully timed to create the impression that Michael Chertoff knew what he was talking about when he announced that he had a “gut feeling” that we are going to have a hot summer and to have created expectations of an imminent attack. For whatever reasons, it did not materialize. But this new warning attributed to Juval Aviv appears to set the stage for another attack soon.
Others share the suspicion that Americans are being set up for another terrorist attack. On 10 July 2007, Paul Joseph Watson wrote, in response to the report from Lt. Col. Doug Delaney (that the West needs more terrorist attacks on the scale of 9/11), “By this logic, if terrorist attacks only boost the geopolitical agents of Western governments, then how is it in their interest to prevent them, and of what benefit are they to the actual terrorists—unless the terrorists occupy positions of power?” More attacks work to their advantage.
As recently as June 23, 2008, McCain’s political advisor, Charles Black, remarked that another terrorist attack on US soil would be good for his candidate. Referring to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto as an "unfortunate event," Black said, "But his knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who's ready to be Commander-in-Chief. And it helped us." Indeed, when The Huffington Post inquired, Black observed “with startling candor” of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil, "Certainly it would be a big advantage to him.”
Chertoff appears to be making no effort to get to the bottom of any of this. Bush can’t claim to be “the security president” if he won’t keep us secure. I find it nauseating that a major political party would so grossly betray the American people. But think about it. Would a party that cared about the citizens of this nation nominate a candidate who is out of touch with reality, impulsive and reckless in his judgment, and intellectually lazy and lacking in curiosity? They appear to have a fallback in case "The Palin Mystique" does not endure.
1 | 2
