A politically hot summer coming?

[freddie]

I don't know about you but I'm getting the feeling that we might see something happen this summer. I've not felt like this for any of the previous 'warning attacks', Texas nuke, Chicago drills, 06/06/06 etc but things seem to be building in the media. In the past week we have seen:

-After the Zogby poll, the release of the latest Bin Laden tape specifically re-linking himself to the planning of 9-11

-7/7 report (lots of mentions of 7/7 and 9-11 on UK news, Rachel N etc..)

-London 'terror raid' and shooting (dominating TV news here now)

-Canadian 'terror raid' (dominating Canadian and US news)

-False alarm 'terror threat' in Washington (Hours of FOX airtime discussing the 'war on terror' and 'the ever present threat')

-Small plane enters restricted Washington airspace and is escorted away by fighter jets (Lots of menacing US TV news coverage until it was out of the way - In the UK too but it was in the middle of the night here)


---Now, that's a one heap of 'terror talk' on our TVs and in our papers. When we look at other events there is (I think) some genuine reason for concern:

-Bush's % approval slips into the 20's, his lowest ever

-Haditha, 1000's of deserters, growing casualties putting the most pressure on Rumsfeld yet

-Isreal getting excited about Iran and talk of terror at the world-cup

-Iran again threatening to switch to Euros for oil trade etc..

-Significant stirings in Syria, possible coup attempt coming

-US aircraft carriers on their way to the Arabian Sea

-US mid-term elections in Nov, theatens to lose Republican majority in Senate


---Now to speculate a little---

-European countries trying to prevent Ahmadinejad from traveling to Germany (why does he want to go? seems a little strange to me, does he know something?)

-The world-cup will be a surveillance hive (possibly to catch patsies on cctv/fingerprint scanners; promoting furthering the surveillance state etc..?)

-Although they have been reducing deployment, the US still has thousands of troops in Germany (possibly to step in an help 'manage' the chaos?)

-(Really, really speculating now) If the ptb wants images of violance / mob rage to promote the idea of increased police presence then bombing the world cup would do it. Imagine all the pissed-up angry footy fans, angry at the world cup being spoiled, angry at being attacked, and with plenty of middle eastern fans to direct their anger at....I'm not saying that would happen, but it would make for a situation something close to one that requires military presence on the streets. And of course any trouble makers will be caught on cctv, further promoting their use....like I said, total speculation.

------------------------

I know we hear stuff like this all the time from the fear-mongering-media, but not in this concentration and not symultaniously in the major western countries - know what I mean?

[catfish]

I know what you mean freddie. Is that why we're still up at ten to four?!

[freddie]

hahaha Catfish - As much as this is playing on my mind, I've got an essay to finnish by Friday so that's my reason for staying up late - Now if only I could stay in study mode for longer without taking so many breaks to down coffee and read news then maybe I'd get it finished.

[Hazzard]

The Hegelian Dialect is going full steam ahead.

Expect more "TERRORIST" attacks. TO gain more control.

[freddie]

More to add to the media heat:

-Fox News is going mad over the Zarqawi murder - Out of their top 6 video links, 5 are about Zarqawi... that's a lot of Fox 'chatter' on the subject of Al-Q and terrorism in general.

-Fox just so happen to be leading with my next piece of the media / political heat... the attack on Palastinians on a Gazan beach and the Hamas' announcement of an end to the truce.

....Perhaps they're planning on ditching Al-Q as the main bady and moving to a wider war against 'Al-Q inspired groups'.

[kookomula]

This has been out a while.

Former CIA Analyst Says Iran Strike Set For June Or July
McGovern: Staged terror attacks across Europe, US "probable" in order to justify invasion

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | June 1 2006

Former CIA analyst and Presidential advisor Ray McGovern, fresh from his heated public confrontation with Donald Rumsfeld, fears that staged terror attacks across Europe and the US are probable in order to justify the Bush administration's plan to launch a military strike against Iran, which he thinks will take place in June or July.

Appearing on The Alex Jones Show, McGovern was asked about the timetable for war in Iran and said that behind the diplomatic smokescreen, the final chess pieces were being moved into position.

"There is already one carrier task force there in the Gulf, two are steaming toward it at the last report I have at least - they will all be there in another week or so."

"The propaganda has been laid, the aircraft carriers are in place, it doesn't take much to fly the bombers out of British and US bases - cruse missiles are at the ready, Israel is egging us on," said McGovern.

McGovern said Iran's likely response to a US air strike would be threefold - mobilizing worldwide terrorist cells that would make Al-Qaeda look like a girls netball team - utilizing its cruise missile arsenal to attack US ships and sending fighters into Iraq to attack US forces.

"The Iranians can easily send three divisions of revolutionary guard troops right over....the long border with Iraq," said McGovern, stating that the local Sunni population of Iraq would welcome such an invasion.

The turmoil caused by such an action would lead the US to tap its so-called 'mini-nuke' arsenal said McGovern, opening a new Pandora's box of chaos.

McGovern highlighted President Bush's all time record low approval ratings as a reason for launching an attack on Iran to again whip up false patriotic fervour.

"I can see Karl Rove saying, 'look what you need to do is become a war president again, get us involved with something pretty big here and then strut around and say you can't vote for a bunch of Democrats to pull the rug out from under me while there's a war going on'."

McGovern drew a comparison with the concillatory cold war stance of Russia and JFK's decision to respond in a similar manner, and the Iranian President's letter which was immediately dismissed by the Bush administration. JFK's approach saved the US from potential nuclear anihalation while Bush's actions put the US in severe danger as Russia and China give ominous mixed signals on what their response to a US strike on Iran will be.

McGovern lambasted Bush's inner circle as uniformly lacking any real military experience and characterized them as a cabal already hell-bent on war.

McGovern entertained the notion that western governments and intelligence hierarchies could potentially stage terror attacks in Europe and the US either before or after an invasion of Iran.

"That's altogether possible," said McGovern.

"I would say even probable because they need some proximate cause, some casus belli to justify really unleashing things on Iran....I would put very little past this crew - their record of dissembling and disingenuousness is unparalleled."

McGovern said that Rove, Cheney and Rumsfeld, fearing impeachment and Enron-style criminal proceedings, are urging President Bush to launch a war in order to create a climate unconducive to lengthy investigations and impeachment proceedings.

Asked to cite specifically when we should expect to see an attack launched, McGovern said, "I think we all agree that an attack is likely before the election and we all agree that it has to do largely with the election - as for timing I see a likelihood that it could come as early as late June or early July, most of my colleagues predict August, September, maybe an October surprise even."

"My thinking is that for it to be October that would be so crass and so transparent that even this crowd would shy away from making it so obvious," said McGovern.

McGovern is set to appear along with a host of other respected and credible whistleblowers at the American Scholars Symposium at the end of this month.

Click here to listen to a clip of the interview with Ray McGovern. Prison Planet.tv members can listen to the entirety of this interview. If you are not a subscriber please consider the great benefits of becoming an exclusive member by clicking here.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2006/010606iranstrike.htm

[kookomula]

Come Down or Set Up?
Bush and the Iran Deal
By GARY LEUPP


Bush administration officials quietly confirm that the U.S. will accept what international law confirms: Iran and every country signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty has the right to enrich uranium for civilian energy purposes. This, following Bush's contention that this provision in the treaty constitutes a "loophole," with the intimation that the treaty (which has some provisions already ignored by the U.S.) ought to be rewritten! This, following Vice President Cheney's repeated declarations that the Iranians are "already sitting on an awful lot of oil and gas. Nobody can figure why they need nuclear as well to generate energy."

The neocons have all along challenged Iran's right to continue the nuclear program begun with U.S. support under the Shah. But now Condoleezza Rice is apparently specifically acknowledging that right. These are significant changes, which will, most likely, result in talks.

But even if Iran suspends enrichment---as it has before during negotiations with the Europeans, as a voluntary confidence-building measure, losing no face thereby---and even if Iranian delegates sit down at the table with Americans somewhat humbled by the mess in Iraq and persuaded reluctantly of the limits of U.S. power, there's still a rocky road ahead. At any point the U.S. could announce that it has new evidence that contradicts Iran's stated denial of a nuclear weapons program, terminate the talks---saying, "We've gone that last mile!"---and begin what would likely be either unilateral military moves against Iran, or ones conducted in tandem with Israel.

In a Fox interview just after the administration announced it would enter multilateral negotiations with Iran if it suspended its enrichment program, UN Ambassador John Bolton made it sound like a likely set-up. "The president's made it very clear he wants to resolve the Iranian nuclear weapons program [sic] though peaceful and diplomatic means, but he's also said that Iran with nuclear weapons is unacceptable," he told his cherubic soul-mate, salivating warmonger Neil Cavuto.

Cavuto: But unacceptable means that if it keeps going on you're going to do something about it . . .

Bolton: No option is taken off the table.

Cavuto: Military as well?

Bolton: Exactly.

Cavuto: Unilateral military action?

Bolton: Secretary Rice made that point . . . that's why . . .

Cavuto: That we would act alone if we had to?

Bolton: That's why he says no option is taken off the table. But it's also why the president has reached out to [Russian] President Putin and other leaders in the past couple of days to say, "We're making a significant step here" -- that will be criticized by many of the president's staunchest supporters here at home, but he's taking this step to show strength and American leadership. He's doing it to say "We gave Iran this last chance to show they are serious when they say 'We don't want nuclear weapons.'" This is "put up or shut up" time for Iran.

Among the "staunchest supporters" of Bush's bellicose policies is of course the notorious former head of the Defense Policy Board who retains strong ties to the neocons surrounding Cheney who have dominated foreign policy to date. Addressing a sympathetic audience at the AIPAC conference in April Richard Perle opined that "The attack [on Iran] would be over before anybody knew what had happened," adding that a dozen B-2 bombers could solve the problem overnight.

Bolton's comment about criticism of the decision may hint at the disappointment felt by Cheney's staff as well as Bolton himself, who's been chomping at the bit to attack Syria and Iran. They may all resent Condi's growing grip on foreign policy and the relative decline in the neocons' power. The changing U.S. position causes some hope that the war plans already well advanced will remain on hold and maybe even be shelved, to the great relief of the top brass and most rational people. But as the diplomatic dance proceeds, one must avoid delusional optimism.

Perhaps there's a relationship between the timing of the Iraqi and the Washington Post's reporting of a strategic retreat from an attack on Iran. It allows the neocons to save some face, surely. Their first project, the imposition of Pax Americana on Afghanistan, has in this fifth year since the fall of Kabul produced anti-American rioting in the capital, reestablishment of Taliban control over the south, record opium harvests, and one U.S. GI death every four days. The second, the acquisition of control over Iraq, has failed miserably. While a college campus-sized "embassy"-the largest in the world---was rising in the heart of Baghdad (a fortress to shelter the world's largest diplomatic mission from the wrath of a people enraged by the Abu Ghraibs, Hadithas, and daily abuses, humiliations and intolerable inconveniences caused by a criminal invasion), 1,400 civilians were killed by "sectarian violence" under the old regime in Baghdad. That's just in Baghdad, and just in May alone! Failure, failure, failure.

And then, a message from Russia and China (and the world in general), delivered through Condi to Bush: We won't play along with your game, designed to legitimate your planned attack on Iran. We won't pass your resolution in the Security Council. Bush reportedly winced as his Secretary of State recommended the first U.S.-Iranian negotiations in 27 years. Hadn't Cheney said, "We don't negotiate with evil, we defeat it"?

Gary Leupp is Professor of History at Tufts University, and Adjunct Professor of Comparative Religion. He is the author of Servants, Shophands and Laborers in in the Cities of Tokugawa Japan; Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan; and Interracial Intimacy in Japan: Western Men and Japanese Women, 1543-1900. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch's merciless chronicle of the wars on Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, Imperial Crusades.

He can be reached at: gleupp@granite.tufts.edu

http://www.counterpunch.com/leupp06092006.html