Hand-Off to Obama?
Crimes of the State
The Washington Post, today,1 has done a pretty good job of encapsulating the fraudulent "war on terrorism" without actually calling it a fraud. One would have to be in-the-know to understand the implications, but they are there if one is willing to study the article.
"There has been no confirmed trace of bin Laden since he narrowly escaped from the CIA and the U.S. military after the battle near Tora Bora, Afghanistan, in December 2001, according to U.S., Pakistani and European officials."
That's a pretty strong statement. No "trace?"
What about all those videos, such as this one that is obviously faked 2 and was cut up from old footage previous to bin Laden's hair turning gray? We can assume the WP editors aren't disputing the veracity of the video evidence in their statement. But, a whole lot of "officials" confirm that "no trace" of bin Laden has been seen in nearly 7 years. Could that be because he's dead? 3
If bin Laden was alive, he could easily produce a video or two per week. He could call attention to the frauds that have gone out in his name. He could be much more active -- I mean -- what does he do all day in his cave and why does it take up so much of his video pontificating timeslot?ISI ANYONE?
The WP article offers some more corroboration of what a number of sharp critics and dissidents have been shouting about for years: 4 ISI (Pakistani intelligence) sponsorship and protection of "Al Qaeda," and even the reported ISI financing of the 9/11 attacks! 5
Evidently, the "New Approach" involves admitting that the Pakistanis are actively protecting and supporting the enemy. That would make the Pakistani government "the enemy" under Bush's "Doctrine."
Not quite. For some reason -- and the article even says this explicitly -- it's been an "open secret." There's been a "double game", and yes the word "game" seems the most appropriate of the piece:
"Afrasiab Khattak, a Pashtun politician based here in the northwestern city of Peshawar, said Pakistani forces would occasionally help the CIA capture second-string al-Qaeda figures, but only to keep the aid money flowing from Washington.
"The Bush administration deceived itself," he said. [Or YOU, and the rest of the world I may add.] "From the very beginning, the Pakistani generals were playing a double game. It was an open secret."
Khattak said he has warned U.S. officials since 2000 of bin Laden's close relations with Pakistan's spymasters, adding that he tried to alert Washington after 2002 that al-Qaeda was rebuilding in the tribal areas."
Those blundering, incompetent Bushies (and Clintonites too). They just wouldn't listen to the dire warnings, or so the fairy tale goes.
"Since 2002, the United States has given more than $10.5 billion in aid to Pakistan, not including funds for covert operations. Much of the money, however, has gone to Pakistan's military or has been spent with little oversight, according to U.S. government audits."
Take our money, please!
One must ask: Precisely what is the purpose of these payments, as it is clearly not to get the Pakistanis to go after bin Laden. It also isn't to allow US military operations inside the disputed area. So, there must be some motive for passing more than $10 billion to the Pakistani generals, whom the article tells us are playing a "double game," with the full knowledge of US intelligence "from the beginning." There must be a reason, indeed.
The reason is obvious, if one is willing to accept that the "war on terrorism" is a fraud from top to bottom. Each "Al Qaeda terrorist" is worth his weight in heroin, and more, to the foreign policy planners in Washington DC.
The "terror" war was never meant to be won, and instead was intended to drag out into a series of conquests that "may never end - at least not in our lifetime," according to Dick Cheney, 6 one of its main architects.
Even Barack Obama, the presumed opposition leader has embraced this glaring fraud. 7
That is not surprising given that Obama's top foreign policy advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski 8 has long been involved in using Islamic radicalism as a tool of US imperial strategy in Asia. His 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard, describes the current "war on terrorism" parardigm9:
"The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America's engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. (pp 24-5)
"For America, the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia..." (p.30)
"In that context, how America 'manages' Eurasia is critical... Eurasia accounts for 60 per cent of the world's GNP and about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." (p.31)
"It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America's power, especially its capacity for military intimidation... But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization." (p.35)
"...the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." (p.40)
"Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat." (p. 211)
Ths is your "hope" and "change" candidate my friends, stripped of the bullshit veneer. Was it ever more crucial to form a third party opposition?Obamarama
Let's accept that Obama is not Brzezinski, and that the two men can differ on "power projection" in Eurasia, despite Obama's recent obsession with 'surging' in Afghanistan.
We still have a fundamental and monumentous challenge: the war on terror fraud, which Obama buys into.
In a recent brawl with mudslinger Jerome Corsi, the Obama campaign published the following: 10
"And in perhaps the gravest sign that [Corsi's] views can’t be trusted, he alleges a government cover-up of the 9/11 attacks and denies that airplanes were to blame for the towers’ collapse."
We can ignore the argument over the towers' collapse, as no mainstream political figure to date has had the balls to challenge the NIST/FEMA collapse theory.
The first part of the quote is beyond astounding, however.
Folks, there is no sane argument that 9/11 hasn't been covered up. I can easily find 1,000 different covered up aspects of the 9/11 attacks. I will do so if contacted by the Obama campaign, to be sure.
But, I really don't need to do that. One example will suffice, from the United States Senate, where Obama has been a member for the last four years:
"The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To urge the President to release information regarding
sources of foreign support for the 9-11 hijackers)
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
Sec. . Sense of the Senate on declassifying portions of
the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001.
(a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
(1) The President has prevented the release to the American public of 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001.
(2) The contents of the redacted pages discuss sources of foreign support for some of the September 11th hijackers while they were in the United States.
(3) The Administration's decision to classify this
information prevents the American people from having access to information about the involvement of certain foreign governments in the terrorist attacks of September 2001.
(4) The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has requested that the President release the 28 pages.
(5) The Senate respects the need to keep information
regarding intelligence sources and methods classified, but the Senate also recognizes that such purposes can be
accomplished through careful selective redaction of specific words and passages, rather than effacing the section's
(b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate
that in light of these findings the President should declassify the 28-page section of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the
Terrorist Attacks of September 2001 that deals with foreign sources of support for the 9-11 hijackers, and that only
those portions of the report that would directly compromise ongoing investigations or reveal intelligence sources and
methods should remain classified.
-Congressional Record: October 28, 2003 (Senate)
Page S13349-S13372 11
Those 28 pages remain classified, Mr. Obama. But, we already know a good deal of what's in it. 12
Obama should, of course, fire whoever wrote the outrageous passage: "And in perhaps the gravest sign that his views can’t be trusted, he alleges a government cover-up of the 9/11 attacks...", and Obama should call immediately for full disclosure of the 9/11 cover up, as some of his fellow Democratic senators have already attempted in bits and pieces.
I am not holding my breath for Obama to suddenly seek the truth of the 9/11 attacks, and I can't say I'm much inspired to vote for him.
An argument can be made that Obama's "soft imperialism" may be more dangerous to life on earth than McCain's obvious brand of idiocy. At least rational people around the world aren't fooled by McCain. The widespread global opposition to US imperialism will be sustained under a McCain presidency, but not necessarily under Obama.
Why not tell Team Obama just what you think of what you've read above?
CONTACT OBAMA 13
"To reach the [Obama] Campaign Headquarters by phone, please call: (866) 675-2008 "
1. Washington Post, In Hunt for Bin Laden, a New Approach, September 10 2008
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 04_pf.html
2. Crimes of the State, Blackbeard Rising (from the grave, again)
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/20 ... again.html
3. Fox News, Report: Bin Laden Already Dead, December 26, 2001
4. Crimes of the State, Updated: ISI and The Wire Transfers of 9/11
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/20 ... f-911.html
5. .Global Research, NEW REVELATIONS ON 9-11
6. UK Guardian, An artificial centre cannot hold, that's the danger, October 22 2001
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oc ... tainand911
7. Global Research, The Democrats endorse the "Global War on Terrorism": Obama "goes after" Osama
8. Online Journal, Zbigniew Brzezinski to be the real power behind an Obama throne
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish ... 3536.shtml
9. From the Wilderness, A War in the Planning for Four Years
10. Obama For America, Unfit For Publication: Setting the Record Straight on the Lies in Jerome Corsi’s “The Obama Nation”
11. Federation of American Scientists, Congressional Record: October 28, 2003 (Senate)
12. Crimes of the State, FBI DOC.- BAYOUMI LINKED TO SAUDI GOVERNMENT
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/20 ... saudi.html
13. Obama Campaign website,