Substitute Journalists ask: Can We Stop an Imminent REPLAY of 9/11 ??

[Guest guest]

S

Thu, 11 Aug 2005 20:50:29 -0700 (PDT)

Substitute Journalists ask: " Can We Stop an Imminent REPLAY

of 9/11 " ??

 

 

Many " area codes " of the online community are abuzz with this story:

the report at " American Conservative " --linked below-- that Cheney's

goons have given orders to STRATCOM to put in place contingency plans

to attack Iran " with conventional and tactical nuclear weapons " in the

event of a repeat of 9/11. With the curious coincidence of an August

Washington DC, and Congress out of town. The aptly titled article

below " The Coming 9/11 For Dummies " (the dummies being the 84% of the

people who approved of Bush's handling of 9/11 in its immediate

aftermath --nope, we weren't in that number) gives the compelling

logic why another 9/11 is imminent, to be used as the pretext du jour

for attacking Iran without actual provocation. Which could be the

opening " salvo " of a World War, no problem.

 

He asks the question, " What will be the weapon of choice? "

 

Before we answer that, let's first do everything we can to circulate

this " rumour " as widely as possible, insofar as many sources, far and

wide, have given credit to the " substitute journalists " for defeating

or deflecting many of the agenda items on the neo-con timetable, as

well as the bogus credibility index given them by non-substitute

journalists.

 

( While we're on this, is a substitute journalist anything like a

substitute teacher, to his profession? I know, at the very least, the

pay isn't anywhere proportionate..... )

 

PEACE: and please be sure to read and circulate the imminent threats

to our national, and international, safety: below:

 

~~~John E

 

 

THE COMING 9/11 FOR DUMMIES

 

By Anwaar Hussain

 

Various polls have been conducted since 2001 to ascertain the job

approval ratings of President George W. Bush. These polls were

conducted by leading media giants and other respectable institutions.

The names of these organizations are CBS News, Zogby International,

Gallup Poll, CNN/USA Today, Fox News, Quinnipic University, PEW

Research Center and Associated Press/IPSOS. These results can be

reached here.

 

The respondents were asked the same question since 2001 through to

2005. The question was;

 

" Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is

handling his job as president? "

 

When averaged out, only 11 % disapproved the President's job

handling immediately post-9/11/2001. Almost 50 % disapprove today--an

alarming increase of about four and a half times the 2001 count.

 

The conclusion of the polls is only one i.e. the disapproval

rating of the US President's job handling is on a shocking rise.

 

What exactly has been President George W. Bush's job? Simply put,

to push the agenda of his sponsors who would like this century to

belong to United States of America in the shape of an Empire with all

challenges to it obliterated forcefully—a fact not many Americans were

aware of in the year 2001. So in other words the increasing

disapproval of the way George W. Bush is handling his Presidential

duties is also a direct disapproval of his sponsor's agenda, of which

the Americans are now becoming ever more aware.

 

Now something has to be done to check the distressing trend

because very regrettably for the sponsors of George W. Bush, this is

happening at an extremely inopportune time for a few awfully simple

reasons.

 

To begin with, the new American Century agenda is just in its

launch phase and can be aborted only at great peril to its authors,

the neocons, who are also the sponsors of George W. Bush. Secondly,

the lead actors in this drama have already crossed the point of no

return on this trajectory. It is all the way from now onwards. There

is no retreat. Period. So many lies have been told, so many heinous

crimes already committed that the choice for the cabal is

frighteningly clear. They stick with the plan on the outside chance of

becoming American idols or abort it and face definite prospects of

having criminal proceedings initiated against them. In other words

they have the choice of either becoming heroes or zeros.

 

Philip Giraldi, a former intelligence officer in the CIA (and

DIA), writes in the [ LINK: ] American Conservative , " In Washington

it is hardly a secret that the same people in and around the

administration who brought you Iraq are preparing to do the same for

Iran. The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick

Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command

(STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in

response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. "

 

According to Philip Giraldi, " the United States is developing a

plan for the bombing of supposed military targets in Iran, which would

include the use of NUCLEAR WEAPONS. The US strike would take place

after a 9/11-type terrorist attack on the US. However, the US attack

would not depend on Iran actually being involved in the terrorism. In

short, the planned attack on Iran would be analogous to the unprovoked

attack on Iraq. "

 

Furthermore, the effects of the old 9/11 seem to be waning on the

American public because of the relentless onslaught of the alternative

media. The London bombings too have not been allowed to have the

desired effect of boosting the flagging public support in Britain and

United States towards the Empire building exercise. The gallant

efforts of the substitute media made sure that the cock and bull

stories are finally seen for what these are.

 

One thing is absolutely clear. The American people have to be

brought back on board before the launch of the next phase of the

Empire building plan. The next phase has been spelled out clearly by

the same people who underwrote phase-1. The Project for New American

Century is the alma mater of George W. Bush's sponsors and the womb of

the New American Century idea. Its Executive Director himself outlines

the future plan in as many words ;

 

" ……lest we forget, one reason the Bush administration promulgated

the possibility of military preemption in its strategic doctrine was

the fact that, in this day and age, one could not count on timely

warning of when states or terrorist groups might be on the verge of

obtaining a devastating capability that puts America and its allies in

serious danger. With denial and deception capabilities in our

adversaries growing, and the seeming holes in U.S. intelligence's

collection capabilities, senior policymakers will rarely, if ever, be

able to count on getting " date certains " to guide key decisions. All

of which returns us to the fact that we have to keep an eye on the

bigger picture: What kind of regime is Iran? What is the history we do

know of its clandestine nuclear program? What are its avowed aims

toward the U.S. and our allies? Why is it developing a ballistic

missile warhead capable of delivering a nuclear weapon? And, last,

what remains of its ties to and support for terrorists?

 

None of this means that the U.S. should be planning an attack

tomorrow. There are numerous practical problems we would confront in

carrying out that decision, even if that were in theory the right one

to make. But it does mean that we have no reason to relax, nor can we

postpone difficult decisions indefinitely. "

 

Please note that the esteemed Executive Director does not promote

an attack on Iran tomorrow. He does not, however, rule out the day

after tomorrow either. He also does not want the powers that be to

`relax' and `postpone difficult decisions indefinitely'.

 

Thus between tomorrow when he does not advocate the attack on Iran

and the day after that he does not rule it out, the American public

has to be brought back onboard to go along with the admittedly

`difficult decisions' that cannot be `postponed indefinitely'.

 

So what can be done to check the rising trend of disapproval of

the President's Job handling rating in the meanwhile? To answer this

question, let us first see what were the most apparent reasons for the

high approval ratings of the year 2001? These were;

 

1. The event of 9/11/2001.

2. A tidal wave of national and international sympathy post-9/11/2001.

 

Let us take a cue from the polls cited at the beginning. A

whopping 84 % of respondents approved the President's job handling

immediately post 9/11/2001, with only 11 % disapproving. If the

President's job handling approval ratings have to go back up to that

level, a similar event must take place. That is a no-brainer.

 

One cannot be `date certain' but another 9/11 seems to be the only

option. It is as simple as that. There is one exception though. This

coming 9/11 has to be bloodier, more spectacular and more devastating

than the earlier 9/11. For not only the emerging doubts in the

American public's mind have to be erased but the approval ratings too

have to be brought back to the post original 9/11 time for the next

phase of Empire building exercise to take off--a double task.

 

Any ideas that come to mind for the weapon of choice? Any one?

 

Copyrights : Anwaar Hussain

http://malakandsky.blogspot.com/2005/08/coming-911-for-dummies.html