Gareth Porter of Inter Press Service (www.ipsnews.net; article available by subscription only, but it’s been posted at antiwar.com and at nonesoblind.org) states that Zbigniew Brzezenski is privately warning that an Al Qaeda terrorist attack on US soil could become a pretext for a war on Iran. The article also mentions repeated accusations by the Bush administration, the Pentagon, and CIA analysts, claiming that Iran is harboring Al Qaeda activists who have been responsible for masterminding terrorist incidents. And Porter cites an article by Bruce Riedel published in Foreign Affairs, arguing that Al Qaeda would benefit from a war between the US and Iran. Riedel claims that Al Qaeda might try to stage a terrorist attack to be blamed on Iran, in order to precipitate such a war.
Foreknowledge of the World Trade Center attacks was telegraphed to the media in the years and months leading up to 9/11/2001, in a manner that’s quite similar to this. There were multiple articles from various intelligence sources appearing over an extended period of time, pointing towards a “new pearl harbor” event. For the details, see Chaim Kupferberg’s articles at globalresearch.ca, and Paul Thompson’s 911 timeline.
In the Open Forum #3 thread at nonesoblind.org, Katrin Reichold mentioned that “I have heard that no president in the history of the US has ever been physically as unprotected as G.W. Bush. (meaning, he sometimes walks, and meets with people alone).” I’m not sure where this rumor comes from. But my guess is that this next upcoming terrorist attack will take the form of an assassination of GW Bush, leaving Dick Cheney in the president’s office. Considering Tecumseh’s curse (presidents elected to office on a 20-year cycle have always died in office, except Reagan who was severely damaged and terrorized by Hinckley’s assassination attempt), and considering GW Bush’s Skull & Bones name (”Temporary”), the only problem with this prediction is that it seems too obvious to be correct.
The leading Democratic presidential candidates might also be taken out in this attack, leaving Cheney with no choice but to postpone the elections. And of course Cheney will take vengeance against Iran (although perhaps it will be preferable strategically to attack Syria first.)
As the war in Iran develops, the flow of oil exports through the Persian Gulf will be disrupted to some extent, and a world economic crisis will follow. The value of the dollar will fall dramatically, and China will try to cash in its reserves before they become worthless. But the US government will expropriate the Chinese government’s reserves, and of course a trade war would ensue. The result of all this will be a devastating drop in the standard of living here in the US and (to a lesser extent) throughout the world. I don’t see how we can avoid continuing the trend towards fascist dictatorship in the US in this situation.
Eventually, I think China will need to join a war against the US in the Middle East, to secure some share of the oil resources there.
And if the Bushite elements aren’t able to carry out exactly the scenario I’ve described, then Hillary or Gore or Obama will take a more careful approach, with years of covert (undeclared) warfare against Iran before they finally undertake an invasion of a weakened opponent. But the final result will be more or less the same, perhaps a few years later.
I think your comments here are correct. It seems likely that all the current media hoopla about declining support for Bushco and the Iraqi front among all Americans, including Republican pols, are merely setting the stage for another October Surprise. A surprise to resurrect the poor neglected EWOT.
Hindsight has now allowed one to see that the speculation that The Iraqi front was merely a simple grab for the unguent Iraqi asset to be somewhat off target. Rather, as somewhat evocative of Poppy Bush’s old trip to OPEC to ask them to raise their oil prices, the Iraqi campaign has served the same agenda as well as providing other benefits mentioned later.
Poppy Bush’s trip to OPEC was intended to allow domestic crude prices to rise under the cover of OPEC’s greater market sway. This clearly at the expense of the American and world economies. So rather than the Iraqi campaign allowing Iraqi oil back onto the world market post Saddam era trade restrictions, it has been further held back ostensibly via the efforts of the insurgents, of whom (ala Alice in Wonderland) are also said to be profitting from the illicit smuggling of the same oil (as stated by CBS 60 Minutes).
Iran is claimed such a threat that the ever theologically phony ‘principled’ Bushco feels compelled to support Sunni extremists outside of Iraqi such as to counter theats from those vile Iranian backed Shiites. Well, hopefully no one will light a match to this recurring ‘blowback’ flatulence. There seems to be so much blowback going around that one wonders what the real source of it is?
With Iranian oil then taken off the world market for the same contrived reasons, the global elites will be in a hammerlock position on energy pricing and supply availability, speculators in ethanol will further drive up the cost of food and tequila thus putting us in a real pickle. That’s with major foreign dollar interest’s pressure probably acting to restrain the private Federal Reserve’s ability to adjust interest rate down to compensate. All while Dubya fiddles.
Just like the lack of Bushco concern over where ~$800 million went that was supposed to buy weapons for the New Iraqi Army. “Oh, that’s the sovereign business of Iraq.” Huh? Cui bono?
BTW, W’s recent trip to Albania did seem very ‘unguarded’. Such that incorrect media speculation was made over what happened to his wrist watch. It seems that he had just prior removed it and placed it in his pocket. But the question remains about his actual level of protection.
I’ve been continuing to spend a fair amount of time commenting over at the nonesoblind.org site, and today one of the regulars, Cliff W, stated:
“But already we hear doubts about the Religious Right’s difficulties with this field: three New York city slickers who all believe in abortion rights. They could easily abandon the Republican candidate for a “Christian” independent candidate like Sam Brownback.”
With the Democratic candidate (probably Hillary) fatally afflicted by a lack of masculinity, and the Republican candidate carrying the burden of the disastrous Bush presidency, there does seem to be an enormous temptation for others to jump in the fray. Especially with the bad example of Lieberman’s successful bolt from the Democrat’s candidate selection process.
It looks like almost certainly Bloomberg will join the field (I didn’t know this until today) and I can’t dispute Cliff’s suggestion that the Christian fundamentalists will field a candidate. Hillary is a Methodist (unlike Clinton who was Southern Baptist evangelical fundamentalist.) No way will the fundamentalists tolerate an election where they lose no matter what.
I think the dynamic will be that the more candidates jump in, the easier it will be for still more to join the fray. Gore will have his following. Why not a genuinely progressive candidate, like Kucinich or even Nader again? Why not Ron Paul — he’s very popular on the Internet and has run in the past as Libertarian? I think there are lots of people in this country who would like to vote for a candidate of principle, especially if the field is badly fragmented and no one is emerging as a leader.
Perhaps no one will get a majority in the Electoral College, and the election will be thrown into the House of Representatives. Who knows, maybe neither Hillary nor Giuliani will even be among the finalists against Gore and Bloomberg and Brownback.
What better time for a terrorist attack.
Within limits, the more players that bet on a particular poker hand, the more likely the the next better will not fold.
Trying to establish anything based upon what religions Hill and Bill were raised in is pretty much like hunting with Mitt Romney. For most of them its all for show, but in the case of Bill being classified as a fundamentalist even in the superficial sense is anomolous on several levels, not that most fundamentalist leaders themselves aren’t a little squirrely themselves. But Bill is far too much of a hedonistic sophist to be sincere, and this probably is just one reason why so many evangelicals were driven into the cynical Bush camp. They are all chameleons.
Bloomberg has said that if he decides to run, as an independant, that he can spend up to $500 million of his $5 billion.
I wouldn’t get my hopes up about anything good coming of this election. Hillary smilingly refused to answer Chris Matthews’ debate question about a pardon for Libby, obviously because of the Marc Rich pardon. This was simply amazing to me, and the union member audience cheered her, our Evita. We deserve the government we get.
Yes, I think there will be a convenient terror attack and we’ll be attacking Iran before the election. The candidates will cower and, you’re right, it may all be moot if it can be sufficient to suspend the elections.
Hello my friend: great blog, i love your site, i have some years visiting your website and reading your articles about crazy people ruling our world. Take care and keep posting articles on it, keep it up to date, coz this is a great revolutionary website you guys have !!!!!
Hi Juan Carlos,
Thanks for stopping by. It’s good to be back blogging again after a long hiatus for research & contemplation. You know I don’t consider myself a revolutionary, but rather an evolutionary Henry George capitalist. Hope to have a chance to win you over!