"Lieberman Latest To Pitch For New Terror Attack; Senator says new president will be welcomed by "test"
by Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Monday, June 30, 2008
"Senator Joe Lieberman has echoed a national talking point by promising that the new president will be welcomed by a terror attack in 2009, continuing a disturbing trend of talking heads anxiously relishing a catastrophic pretext to reinvigorate the Neo-Con agenda.
"Our enemies will test the new president early," Lieberman, I-Conn., told Face The Nation host Bob Schieffer. "Remember that the truck bombing of the World Trade Center happened in the first year of the Clinton administration. 9/11 happened in the first year of the Bush administration."
Lieberman's comments follow last month's Washington Times report concerning a warning from national intelligence spooks that, "Islamic terrorists will attempt to exploit the transition in power by planning an attack on America."
Let us swiftly dismantle the naive pretense that a terror attack is a negative thing for a new president - both Clinton and Bush exploited terror in America to realize preconceived domestic and geopolitical agendas.
The 1993 World Trade Center bombing was an inside job from start to finish - it did not come as a "surprise" to the U.S. government since they ran the entire operation, having cooked the bomb for the "Islamic terrorists" that they had groomed for the attack.
In 1993 the FBI planted their informant, Emad A. Salem, within a radical Arab group in New York led by Ramzi Yousef. Salem was ordered to encourage the group to carry out a bombing targeting the World Trade Center's twin towers. Under the illusion that the project was a sting operation, Salem asked the FBI for harmless dummy explosives which he would use to assemble the bomb and then pass on to the group. At this point the FBI cut Salem out of the loop and provided the group with real explosives, leading to the attack on February 26 that killed six and injured over a thousand people. The FBI's failure to prevent the bombing was reported on by the New York Times in October 1993.
The attack, coupled with the Oklahoma City bombing less than two years later, enabled Bill Clinton to whip up support for the passage of a plethora of unconstitutional legislation, including the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the Brady Bill, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, and a $100 million dollar grant to Israel for "counter-terrorism" purposes.
By the time Clinton left office, the Patriot movement - which before the OKC bombing had grown in leaps and bounds, spurred on by the atrocities committed by the federal government at Waco - was effectively dead.
Few need reminding of George W. Bush's agenda before he took office. The ideological framework that would shape his presidency - encapsulated by the goals of the Neo-Con Project For a New American Century - required a "new Pearl Harbor" to get things started, which is exactly what they received on September 11, 2001.
Furthermore, the attacks enabled Bush to pursue an invasion of Iraq that he had dreamed of achieving as early as 1999, according to the ghostwriter of Bush's autobiography Mickey Herskowitz.
"One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief. My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. If I have a chance to invade---if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency," Bush told Herskowitz.
That "chance to invade" arrived on the morning of 9/11, within hours of which Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, "Was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq — even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks."
The pattern is clear - each time a new President takes office they have a mandate to act as a torch bearer for the same agenda - domestic repression and foreign invasion. A terror attack provides the perfect pretext to realize those goals.
Whether it be Barack Obama or John McCain, we can expect a new crisis to conveniently arrive shortly after they take office, enabling them to pursue the same tyrannical blueprint followed by their predecessors."
"False Flags for Denver DNC?
Judith Young
Pacific FP
Monday, June 30, 2008
On June 24, 2008 on the Alex Jones Show, a nationally syndicated news/talk program that also has a huge Internet audience, retired CIA analyst Ray McGovern discussed the potential for a U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran before the Bush Administration leaves office next year.
Former morning briefer for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr., McGovern noted that Iran is carefully avoiding any actions that could be interpreted as provocations for an attack: hence justification for an attack would require a pretext manufactured by the Administration and/or the Israelis.
In an editorial published by AntiWar.com on June 20, McGovern had brought our attention to a little-noticed statement by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert about a June 4 White House meeting with President George W. Bush:
- "We reached agreement on the need to take care of the Iranian threat. I left with a lot less question marks [than] I had entered with regarding the means, the timetable restrictions, and American resoluteness to deal with the problem. George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian threat and the need to vanquish it, and intends to act on that matter before the end of his term in the White House."1
McGovern concluded that a perfect storm seems to be gathering in late summer or early fall, when the Bush Administration and allies in Israel will launch attacks against Iran.
There is reason to hypothesize that the requisite staged provocation for an attack on Iran has already been planned and is scheduled to take place in Denver at the time of the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in late August.
This hypothesis stems from information from insider geopolitical specialists who are disgusted by the ruthless onslaught of fascism in the United States and are fighting it at great risk from behind the scenes. It is also supported by circumstantial evidence, including “anti-terrorism” drills held in Denver throughout the week of June 16, 2008.
The weeklong “realistic urban environment” drills conducted by the U.S. Special Operations Command, which coordinates all the military branches’ crack commando units from Army Rangers to Navy SEALS, featured unmarked black helicopters conducting maneuvers and landings as well as the loading and unloading of Special Operations forces at multiple locations in the city.
Two major staging grounds placed under military control with the blessing of the city were a large abandoned rubber factory on the south side of Denver and the former Children’s Hospital at Downey and 21st Street. A Halliburton truck was observed with the designation 'Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team' (CST), a team sporting a number of large SUVs carrying sophisticated communication equipment.
A special Department of Defense anti-terrorism unit based in Wyoming, CST was present in Denver in alignment with the scenario posited by the drills: the detonation of a weapon of mass destruction, such as a radioactive dirty bomb, that would kill 20,000 people.2
Special Operations Command spokesman Lt. Steve Ruh said the drills were a culmination of a two-week training exercise that was part of the “war on terror.” Denver mayor John Hickenlooper denied that the exercises were security preparations for the DNC in August.
However, the following arguments could be posed for a connection with the DNC, not only as security preparations but also as dry run preparations for detonation of a contrived terrorist dirty bomb somewhere in the city.
In other major false flag “terrorist” events, such as the 9/11 attacks on U.S. targets in 2001 and the “7/7” subway bombings in London in 2005, prior terrorism drills were held that were similar in key aspects to the later false flag events themselves.
Dry run preparations for a dirty bomb would provide valuable experience regarding implementing that particular event in that particular urban location (such as familiarity with the city layout, including that of subways and hospitals).
Anti-terrorism, anti-protest, and other security measures would already be in place at the time of the Convention, including detention camps and an array of armed personnel and weaponry.
The choice of a presidential campaign convention as the occasion for the dirty bomb would readily lend itself to official maligning of the perpetrators for committing horrifying violence during an event so symbolic of the American democratic tradition. With Iran as the proclaimed culprit, the propaganda machine could thus go into high gear in its efforts to galvanize support for war.
It would also lend itself to scare tactics capitalizing on the terrorists’ ability to breach the massive security measures surrounding such an event. And with Iran as the declared perpetrator, official spin regarding its puported nuclear ambitions would gain new credibility.
Finally, a staged “Iranian” dirty bomb detonated to coincide with the DNC in August could be expected to revitalize support for the Bush Administration’s post 9/11 anti-terrorism matrix and for the neocon ideology that has infused it.
For many months, a number of political analysts have feared that elements in the Bush Administration have been planning major false flag “terrorism” such as the detonation of a radioactive “dirty bomb” in a U.S. city, terrorism on a scale that would justify cancellation of the coming presidential election, a declaration of martial law, and refusal to relinquish power to a successor administration.
In May 2007, Bush issued National Security Directive No. 51 giving himself, on his own initiative, the power to control the executive, legislative, and judicial branches -- all functions of government -- in the event of a catastrophic national emergency. National emergency is defined elastically as “any incident, regardless of location” that would “damage or disrupt” the U.S. population, economy, or government functions.
There is no language in Directive 51 that requires Bush to obtain the consent of Congress before he seizes such power, nor is there an acknowledgement that under existing law he is already required to do just that. Directive 51 simply ignores the existing National Emergencies Act, and in so doing Bush authorizes himself - or if he is disabled, the Vice President - to control all functions of government for the duration of the emergency “and afterward.”
A combination of official pronouncements, expansion of executive powers, and Congressional trends has led many analysts to fear that another self-serving problem-reaction-solution scenario is indeed in the offing, in which as a response to the reaction of widespread public fear the solution of martial law would be offered and welcomed.
Under Presidential Directive 51, martial law in the U.S. would automatically extend to Canada and Mexico as a result of advances, achieved largely through stealth and disinformation, in implementing a North American Union (NAU). Under martial law, the U.S. President would assume authoritarian control over the three governmental functions—executive, legislative and judicial—for all three nations.
Extending martial law even more globally could be facilitated by staging additional events entailing further massive loss of life.
If these events ensued within days of the first instance of violence and death, they would preclude any real recovery of the populace from the original trauma, and indeed they would escalate it to the degree necessary for acceptance of worldwide martial governance.
A warning of just such a scenario was given in 1974 by Dr. Wernher von Braun, who stated that the dark forces controlling world wealth and political power had over a third of a century ago planned a series of escalating false flag events as a means for acquiring total global control.3
This broader sort of speculation is in fact just that. But our minimal hypothesis of upcoming false flag terrorism in Denver is supported in its general themes by the informed analysis of astute thinkers in the public arena, and in its more specific expectations by the insider leaks of “White Hat” patriots. A parallel situation occurred six months ago when sources within the U.S. intelligence community leaked a neocon plot to assassinate Presidential candidate Ron Paul to freedom fighter and intrepid researcher Daniel Estulin.
In mid-December 2007 staff writer Paul Joseph Watson of Alex Jones’ Prison Planet.com reported these events:
- "Best-selling author and Bilderberg sleuth Daniel Estulin says he has received information from sources inside the U.S. intelligence community which suggests that people from the highest levels of the U.S. government are considering an assassination attempt against Congressman Ron Paul because they are threatened by his burgeoning popularity.
- "Estulin, whose information has unfortunately proven very accurate in the past, went public with the bombshell news during an appearance on The Alex Jones Show today….
- "Estulin, an award winning investigative journalist, said that he was given the information from a source that has been reliable for over a decade in providing accurate projections of future events based on what the elite were discussing in their own circles…
- "The Ron Paul phenomenon has galvanized an entire nation," said Estulin, adding that both the people who discovered the plot and its potential protagonists are terrified at the consequences of what such an action will be because of the difficulty in judging just how severely the general public will react."4
In a second article on December 21, 2007, Watson revealed additional information:
- "Appearing [again] on The Alex Jones Show, Estulin said that his sources for the information were real patriots who love America and are desperate to see the truth get out, but that he always took the precaution of getting verification from more than one individual on each piece of information he releases.
- "What I said about Ron Paul last week came from two different people who don't know each other," said Estulin, adding that his source had in turn got the information from sources within the Neo-Con camp and that it was individuals from within the Neo-Con camp that are considering what would happen if Ron Paul was assassinated."5
Estulin publicized the plot at length on the Alex Jones radio and television venues, which resulted in its massive exposure across the Internet and in giving its perpetrators the answer they had been seeking regarding probable public reaction to an assassination of Ron Paul.
There are wonderful lessons here for the current case of insider concern about a horrific DNC false flag disaster that could claim 20,000 lives. Even if this concern has only a small probability of manifesting, it is nevertheless vital to disseminate it widely with a view to thwarting the plot and all of its attendant horrors.
End Notes
1 Ray McGovern, “Bomb Iran? What’s to Stop Us?” AntiWar.com, June 20, 2008.
2 Kurt Nimmo, “Martial Law Exercises Continue in Denver,” Infowars, June 18, 2008. www.infowars.com.
3 Testimony of Dr. Carol Rosin, NEXUS Magazine, December 2000.
4 Paul Joseph Watson, “Estulin: Elitists Consider Assassinating Ron Paul,” Prison Planet, December 14, 2007.
5 Paul Joseph Watson, “Estulin: Neo-Cons Behind Potential Hit on Ron Paul,” Prison Planet, December 21, 2007.
Copyright © Infowars.net All rights reserved.
Printed from: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2008/300608DNC.htm
