{"article":{"id":217994,"heading":"They Protest Too Much: Another False Flag Imminent?","author":"911=PNAC, CIA, Mossad","created":"2008-06-01 17:49:29","modified":"2013-11-11 00:53:36","last_modified":"Mon, 11 Nov 2013 08:53:36","article":"

Hmmmm.

We are seeing a LOT of stories about Osama these days.

I am reminded of August 2001, where the media was full of Osama stories. And it wasn't that he had actually done anything newsworthy; we were just being reminded constantly what a bad fellow he was. I wrote then that all the Osama stories looked like a PR run-up, and now we are seeing the same again.

And again, this story fits the pattern. Osama hasn't actually done anything. It's just waving him in our faces. And they're really grasping at straws, too.

As for Osama being dead, more info on that is HERE:

http:\/\/www.whatreallyhappened.com\/osama_dead.html<\/a>

Then, remember episodes such as Benazir Bhutto, just weeks before her assassination - that the British Government helped cover up - told the BBC that \"Sheik Ahmed (was) the man who murdered Osama bin Laden\".

The plain fact is that there has been no authentic video of Osama since the end of 2001. Everything shown on TV is re-edited old footage or an obvious actor in a fake beard. Their messages have grown increasingly transparently designed to fit the 'Neo-Con' need of the day, like the last one, which corresponded with a concerted effort by Israel and Bush to link Resistance to Zionism's bruatalization of the Palestinians, to the non-existent 'war on terror'.

Just think about the last few days, in which Scott McClellan has reminded us of how badly we were lied to to get us into the war.

Can you dismiss the idea that \"Osama\" is just another part of that lie?

Or 9-11 itself?

Rumors of OBL Death Put to Rest

http:\/\/abcnews.go.com\/Blotter\/story?id=4955686&page=1<\/a>

Read the story.

No credible journalist would even claim with a straight face that such dubious rumours from suspect (or anonymous) sources puts anything to rest.

Al-Qaeda's terrifying vision of a devastated America in the wake of a nuclear attack

http:\/\/www.thisislondon.co.uk\/news\/article-23488455-details\/Al-Qaeda<\/a>'s+terrifying+vision+of+a+devastated+America+in+the+wake+of+a+nuclear+attack\/article.do

The images come from a video game called 'Fallout'. If you truly believe the intelligence services can't find the operators of these sites (many revealed to have been run out of US states and Israel), you don't understand the internet.

CIA chief claims big gains against al-Qaeda

(But 'more strikes possible')

http:\/\/www.cbc.ca\/world\/story\/2008\/05\/30\/alqaeda-cia.html<\/a>

Note that he only makes these false claims in order to segue into these 'dire warnings' of an attack they know is coming - but don't know anything about.

Gingrich quips Bush should have allowed some 'reminder' attacks

http:\/\/rawstory.com\/news\/2008\/Gingrich_Bush_should_have_allowed_attack_0529.html<\/a>

MOTIVE:

Iran Will Cooperate with UN Probe into US\/Israeli Allegations

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?13896S<\/a>

Israel's Syrian Air Strike Was Aimed at Iran

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?8196S<\/a>

The ME has had a Secretive Nuclear Power in its Midst for Years

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?8195S<\/a>

Spooks Refuse to Toe Cheney's Line on Iran

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?8173S<\/a>

IAEA Again Verifies Iranian Compliance

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?8130S<\/a>

Israel Considering Strike on Iran Despite US Intelligence Report

http:\/\/www.guardian.co.uk\/iran\/story\/0<\/a>,,2224052,00.html

US intelligence report heightens danger of Israeli strike on Iran

http:\/\/wsws.org\/articles\/2007\/dec2007\/isra-d06.shtml<\/a>

'Laptop of Death': Revising the NIE on Iran

The entire claim that Iran was building nuclear weapons rests on a laptop provided by a single, dubious source.

www.antiwar.com \/ips\/akhavi.php?articleid=12028 www.antiwar.com \/prather\/?articleid=12025

Israeli Extremists Prep for Nuclear Strike on Iran

http:\/\/www.israel.indymedia.org\/newswire\/display\/7903\/index.php<\/a>

Hersh: Israel Pressed me to Write Syrian Site was Nuclear

http:\/\/www.rawstory.com\/news\/2008\/Sy_Hersh_Israeli_raid_on_Syria_0208.html<\/a>

Sy Hersh confirms: Syrian Facility Bombed by Israel Not Nuclear

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?10935S<\/a>

A Strike in the Dark - What did Israel bomb in Syria?

by Seymour M. Hersh

http:\/\/www.newyorker.com\/reporting\/2008\/02\/11\/080211fa_fact_hersh\/?printable=tr<\/a>

War Clouds Over Mideast

http:\/\/www.arabnews.com\/?page=7<\/a>§ion=0&article=108719&d=8&m=4&y=2008

Israel & The 'Clash of Civilizations'

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?11022S<\/a>

The largest threat to the region doesn't come from Iran: it comes from Israel's success in having had the US \"neutralize\" countries which it believes to be an existential threat to it's existence. However, there's just one little problem with this approach concerning Iran. Russia's diplomats have stated unequivocally that any attack against Iran will be perceived as an attack on Russia.

UN Nuclear Watchdog in Milestone Iran Deal

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?14262S<\/a>

Iran Dumps US Dollar in Oil Trading, US Preps War

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?14276S<\/a>

Israel's Extremists STILL Beating Iran War Drums

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?14360S<\/a>

Israel, US Joint Plotting Against Iran, Attack ElBaredei

http:\/\/www.israel.indymedia.org\/newswire\/display\/7888\/index.php<\/a> llll

ElBaradei: Iran Not After Bomb

http:\/\/www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/05\/399278.html<\/a>

Israel Calls for US Blockade of Iran

http:\/\/www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/05\/399342.html<\/a>

Iran Mosque Blast Plotters Admit Israeli, US Links

http:\/\/www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/05\/399467.html<\/a>



Removing these War Criminals from power and holding them accountable for their crimes would eliminate this threat entirely ... <\/p>\n","contact":"","link":"","address":"","phone":"","parent_id":0,"mime_type":"text\/plain","summary":"Their hopes for feigning a justification for another illegal war - this time against Iran - because nobody bought their attempts at 'the Iraq treatment' this time around, I worry that the US\/Israeli 'Neo-Cons' are planning another False Flag Attack, as recent headlines bring back memories of those immediately preceding the Israeli-American Neo-Con False Flag of 9\/11, 2001. ","numcomment":1,"fileurl":"\/uploads\/","filesize":null,"article_url":"\/news\/2008\/06\/217994.php"},"attachments":[],"comments":[{"id":218063,"heading":"McClellan's Warning on Iran","article":"It's time to DEMAND that our 'elected leaders' take action against these criminals, and if they won't, to hold them accountable for their own crimes in collaborating in these War Crimes. \r\n\r\n\r\nMcClellan's Warning on Iran \r\nby Ray McGovern \r\n\r\nStop! Please. \r\n\r\nGet beneath the hype over former White House press secretary Scott McClellan's book, What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception. Don't miss the forest for the trees. \r\n\r\nNot since John Dean told the truth about President Richard Nixon's crimes have we had an account by a very close aide to a sitting president charging him with crimes of the most serious kind. \r\n\r\nMcClellan writes that George W. Bush abandoned "candor and honesty" to wage a "political campaign" that led the nation into an "unnecessary war." \r\n\r\nThe chief U.S. prosecutor of senior Nazi officials at the post-World War II Nuremberg Trials, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, labeled such action \u2013 more correctly termed a war of aggression \u2013 the "supreme international crime." \r\n\r\nIn other words, President Bush used propaganda and deception to lead the United States into what an earlier generation of American leaders judged not just a war crime, but the "supreme" war crime. \r\n\r\nAnd, in all this, Bush had an eager cast aiding and abetting \u2013 from careerists in the U.S. intelligence community to the fawning corporate media (FCM) whom McClellan referred to as "deferential, complicit enablers." \r\n\r\nAs for the role of intelligence, McClellan tells of "shading the truth." In the effort to convince the world that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, the president used "innuendo and implication" and intentional ignoring of intelligence to the contrary. \r\n\r\nWater over the dam, you say? No way. \r\n\r\nWhite House spinners are at it again \u2013 "fixing" the intelligence around the policy, this time on Iran. The fixing is obvious, but don't expect to hear about it from the FCM. \r\n\r\nAn exception is MSNBC's Keith Olbermann. His antiquated approach is to ask relevant questions \u2013 like, for example, will the White House do an encore in preparing us for an attack on Iran? \r\n\r\nInterviewing McClellan Thursday evening, Olbermann earmarked time to discuss Iran and asked, "So knowing what you know, if [White House spokeswoman] Dana Perino starts making noises similar to what you heard from Ari Fleischer in 2002 \u2026 would you be suspicious?" \r\n\r\n"I would be," McClellan said. \r\n\r\nWait. Before taking this with a blas\u00e9 shrug, consider the source. \r\n\r\nFixing In Fits and Starts \r\n\r\nThe worst-kept secret in Washington is that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are looking for a pretext to order air and missile attacks on Iran. But when and how will Dana Perino and the rest of the propaganda machine market this one? \r\n\r\nWhen to sell? If former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card's dictum regarding "marketing" the war on Iraq holds sway \u2013 i.e., "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August" \u2013 the administration has only two months, unless it opts for an "October Surprise" as a more effective way to help achieve a Republican victory in November. \r\n\r\nBut a smooth rolling out of war on Iran has proven more troublesome \u2013 no thanks, by the way, to the FCM, most of them still claiming they did just fine before the war on Iraq. \r\n\r\nPart of the problem has been the new marketers. With Andy Card, Karl Rove, Dan Bartlett, and Tony Snow gone, it is amateur hour for White House spinners as they start-stop and rotate rationales for striking Iran. \r\n\r\nAnd how to sell? Less than a year ago the focus was twofold: \r\n\r\n(1) What President Bush on Aug. 28 called "Tehran's murderous activities" against our troops, including "240-millimeter rockets that have been manufactured in Iran and that had been provided to Iraqi extremist groups by Iranian agents;" and \r\n\r\n(2) His ad-lib on Oct. 17: "We've got a leader in Iran who has announced he wants to destroy Israel. \u2026 I take the threat of a nuclear Iran very seriously." \r\n\r\nOops\u2026 \r\n\r\nBut where are those 240-millimeter rocket shells? For some reason, Gen. David Petraeus cannot deliver the goods. \r\n\r\nAs recently as April 25, his nominal boss, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Adm. Mike Mullen, invited the press to what was supposed to be a well-oiled show-and-tell exercise "in a couple of weeks," to display a multitude of captured weapons from Iran. \r\n\r\nBut the show did not go on; it had to be canceled when the weapons that had been found proved not to be of Iranian origin. \r\n\r\nIronically, one major hurdle would be getting senior Iraqi officials to go along with a hyped-up demonstration of weaponry from Iran. \r\n\r\nShortly after Mullen offered his invitation, the Iraqis announced that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had formed his own Cabinet committee to investigate U.S. claims about Iranian weapons, and to attempt to "find tangible information and not information based on speculation." \r\n\r\nThe other pretext is the hyped-up danger from Iran's nuclear program. \r\n\r\nHere, the administration suffered acute embarrassment when a vestigial group of honest intelligence analysts and supervisors had the temerity to serve up an un-fixed intelligence National Intelligence Estimate last fall that showed that Bush had been knowingly exaggerating the nuclear threat from Iran. \r\n\r\nThe declassified key findings of the NIE were released on Dec. 3. They included: \r\n\r\n"We judge with high confidence that in the fall of 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program; we also assess with moderate to high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons." \r\n\r\n"We assess with moderate confidence Tehran has not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons." \r\n\r\n"Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005. Our assessment that the program probably was halted primarily in response to international pressure suggests Iran may be more vulnerable to influence on the issue than we judged previously." \r\n\r\nTo Bush and Cheney's (and Israel's) dismay, the findings had been shared with Congress and could not be suppressed. \r\n\r\nWhat followed was the ineffably inept performance one has come to expect from National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, who claimed the Estimate "confirms we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons [which] remains a very serious problem." \r\n\r\nAnd before leaving for his early January 2008 trip to the Middle East, the president said part of his purpose was to make it "abundantly clear \u2026 that we view Iran as a threat, and that the NIE in no way lessens that threat, but in fact clarifies the threat." \r\n\r\nGot that? \r\n\r\nThreat. \r\n\r\nAccording to Newsweek's well-connected reporter Michael Hirsh, Bush all but disowned the NIE in conversations with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. \r\n\r\nAccording to a senior U.S. official accompanying the president, Bush told the Israelis that he couldn't control what the intelligence community says, but that the Estimate's key judgments do not reflect his own views. \r\n\r\nBush reportedly had briefed Olmert in November on the Estimate's findings, and he seemed almost apologetic about the findings. \r\n\r\nAfter Bush departed Israel in January, a Newsweek reporter asked Olmert if he felt reassured, to which Olmert replied, "I am very happy." \r\n\r\nA Flexible Director of National Intelligence \r\n\r\nMalleable Mike McConnell showed his true colors shortly after the president got back from Israel. \r\n\r\nUnable to withstand withering criticism from the likes of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger, and the irrepressible former U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton, McConnell backpedaled. \r\n\r\nIn testimony to the Senate on Feb. 5 he confessed to careless wording in the NIE due to time constraints, and even indicated he "probably would have changed a thing or two." \r\n\r\nHe would now say, for example, that "maybe even the least significant portion [of the Iranian nuclear program] was halted and there are other parts that continue." \r\n\r\nNext at bat was the president himself in an interview on March 19 with the U.S.-government-run Radio Farda broadcasting to Iran in Farsi. \r\n\r\nBush asserted that Iran has "declared it wants a nuclear weapon to destroy people" and that it could be hiding a secret program. A White House cleanup team conceded that Bush's statement about what Iran has "declared" was inaccurate. \r\n\r\nIt was Defense Secretary Robert Gates' turn in April. Speaking at West Point, Gates said he believes Iran is "hell bent" on acquiring nuclear weapons. (Does it strike anyone that abandoning their weapons program in 2003 seems a strange way of going about it?) \r\n\r\nGates added that he favored keeping the military option against Iran on the table. \r\n\r\nThe NY Times Jumps In \r\n\r\nAnd on May 27, the New York Times misquoted one of the key judgments of the NIE. More than a subtle distinction, the Times indicated that the Estimate stated, "It was uncertain whether the weapons work had resumed." \r\n\r\nSpeaking to the pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) two days later, McConnell's deputy, Donald Kerr, took the same line, emphasizing that "since the halted activities were part of an unannounced secret program Iran attempted to hide, we do not know if it has been restarted." (Emphasis in original) \r\n\r\nThis is the spin that the president, senior officials \u2013 and the New York Times \u2013 have been putting on the NIE. \r\n\r\nAs noted above, the relevant NIE key judgment reads: "We assess with moderate confidence Tehran has not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007\u2026" \r\n\r\n(Incidentally, that Kerr, as deputy to McConnell, would give a major address to WINEP moves the intelligence community much too close to a partisanship with this group, at least for this veteran intelligence officer's taste. Martin Indyk, erstwhile research director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, America's self-described "pro-Israel lobby," founded the institute. AIPAC is listed as its parent organization.) \r\n\r\nRather than shadowboxing, making confessions when it seems opportune, and introducing subtle changes of emphasis aimed at making the Estimate's judgments more politically palatable, McConnell and Kerr should do their duty. \r\n\r\nAnd that is to follow the long established intelligence community procedure for updating an important NIE by ordering preparation of what is called a "Memorandum to Holders" \u2013 in this case, holders of last fall's NIE on Iran. \r\n\r\nThis is an orderly, time-tested way to get the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies that prepared the NIE on Iran to revisit it in a deliberate and rigorous way and to indicate what, if anything, they believe needs to be changed. \r\n\r\nAt the release of the unclassified version of the NIE on Iran on Dec. 3, 2007, Kerr issued a written statement explaining why the key judgments were being made public. \r\n\r\n"Since our understanding of Iran's capabilities has changed, we felt it was important to release this information to ensure that an accurate presentation is available," he said. \r\n\r\nExactly right. So if the NIE's judgments are being challenged and\/or are in need of update, let Kerr or McConnell give the task to the dedicated professionals responsible for drafting the NIE late last year. \r\n\r\nAnd if McConnell should decide \u2013 or be told by the White House \u2013 not to, the congressional oversight committees should awake from their stupor and require a Memorandum for Holders. \r\n\r\nIt is certainly their prerogative, their duty, to do so. \r\n\r\nSomeone apparently needs to tell Director McConnell that it is not required that the Israelis \u2013 or Kissinger, or Schlesinger, or Bolton \u2013 agree with the Estimate's conclusions, however much the president would like all to be in sync with the preferred line. \r\n\r\nAnd, given the stakes, the new findings should not be rushed or done on the cheap. \r\n\r\nLearning Curve Still Steep \r\n\r\nMcConnell (and Kerr, for that matter) are still new to substantive intelligence analysis, and McConnell has admitted having difficulty with the rigorous demands of the job. Frankly, I find it unsettling that one of them briefs the president six mornings a week. \r\n\r\nMcConnell's lack of experience on issues other than technical intelligence collection showed through in an especially troubling way on Feb. 27, 2007, as he briefed the Senate Armed Services Committee. \r\n\r\nSen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked McConnell why the Israelis sometimes have a different view on Iran's nuclear program. \r\n\r\nMcConnell appeared quite puzzled, noting the closeness of the U.S.-Israeli intelligence relationship and how U.S. intelligence officers discussed these things with the Israelis. As I watched, I could not help feeling sorry for the director of national intelligence \u2013 and for the rest of us, as well. \r\n\r\nA pity that his predecessor, the more seasoned John Negroponte, did not take time to tell McConnell what he told NPR's Robert Siegel before Negroponte quit to go back to the State Department. \r\n\r\nAsked by Siegel to explain why the Israelis have suggested a much shorter timeline for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, Negroponte stated the obvious with bluntness uncommon for a diplomat: "I think that sometimes what the Israelis will do [is] give you the worst-case assessment." \r\n\r\nReally! \r\n","author":"Al Qaeda = PNAC, CIA, Mossad, MI6","parent_id":217994,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2008-06-04 14:02:56","modified":"2013-11-11 00:53:41","fileurl":""}]}