Crisis Newsletter

[ian neal]

The following is the latest in a series of occasional newsletters written by Ian Henshall, author of 9/11 revelaed and 911dossier.co.uk. Ian's writing is always worth a read. Please help publicise his talk in London on Monday

Thanks

CRISISNEWSLETTER

1. IRAN - THE GATHERING STORM
Claims the White House wants a peaceful solution should not be taken at face value, but the prospect of military and financial meltdowm for the American Empire could yet head off war. Indications that Rove and "Al Qaeda" plan October Surprise.

2. PUBLIC MEETING MONDAY 16 OCTOBER
Magic bullet or conspiracy black hole: should the Left support the 911 Truth Movement? Leftists who believe the official 911 story welcome to attend.

1. THE GATHERING STORM

http://www.911dossier.co.uk/warlooms.html

Last crisisnewsletter warned readers to expect a hot autumn, and the indications are if anything worse than ever. In this survey we look at war plans against Iran, the next move from "Al Qaeda" and what happens then the war ends.

The apparent good news is also the bad news. Israel's bloody nose in Lebanon may have knocked some of the shine off the military jackboot, but the pro-Isreal lobby is retrenching.

With nuclear missiles directed at every Arab capital why should Israel change its strategy just because a few of their "dumb animals" in the military (a phrase ascribed to Henry Kissinger) have been blown away by Hizbollah. When you are a warmonger and out of the line of fire, flirting with war is a win-win game: the setback in Lebanon has only strengthened the hawks.

Currently the big lie is that Iran wishes to commit genocide against Israel. Iran has in fact made its position clear: they wish to remove Israel from the face of the map using non-military means. Given that Isreal has been an unmitigated disaster for almost everyone, including Jewish people who live there (but excluding the lucrative Tel Aviv and Washington war industries) this is hardly an unreasonable position.

All it would take to dissolve Isreal would be a change of policy in Washington. This can happen - Saddam Hussein was once a favoured ally. This is why the more far sighted Israelis like Uri Avnery and a recent
commentator in Haaretz are saying that rather than wait for that, the experiment has failed and should be wound up now from a position of strength.

Precedents for the peaceful dissolution of Isreal are the Soviet Union, East
Germany or Scotland. You don't need to take Iran's position on trust: with
one of the world's largest nuclear arsenals directed at it, an Iranian attack on Isreal, even a nuclear attack in the distant future, would be guaranteed to turn Iran's major cities to glass.

"AL QAEDA"

Having established the Iran genocide lie, the warmongers went on to spin us the fake "liquid bomb" threat. The liquid bombs would have required more than half an hour of highly skilled prepration in a plane's toilet to have any chance of exploding, but when you have the mentality of Home Secretary (and ex-communist enforcer) John Reid it's smart politics to wreck people's holidays and blame it on the Muslim enemy.

Lately they have conjured up a new threat: veiled Muslim women. Like David Blunkett Jack Straw seems to feel threatened by women who won't drop them for him. This "debate" has been peddled enthusiastically across the corporate media by ignorant reporters who are largely unaware that "Al Qaeda" operatives are often modern - they drink, snort coke and womanise, as reports from Florida, Turkey and Las Vegas confirm.

Veiled women have about as much connection with "Al Qaeda" as Catholic nuns have with the Pentagon.

Meanwhile Karl Rove has promised Republicans an October surprise to et them through the elections. Bush, facing meltdown in the mid terms, looks set to get another free gift from his old family friends. Hamid Mir and Al Quds are both reporting that "Al Qaeda" has announced a major attack on the US. These two sources have been cited in the Western media in the past as authorities and there is little doubt that, whoever really controls "Al Qaeda", middle ranking operatives do talk to them.

John Kerry has asserted that it was Osama Bin Laden who won the presidency for Bush. His fuzzy video was released three days before the election in 2004. "Osama" showed no ageing in four years on the run with kidney disease, but politically he had advanced by several centuries, bringing in Michael Moore and other Republican hate figures as his role models in a speech that sceptics said was probably drafted in Langley, Virginia.

Could the next attack be planned for the UK? 40% of the US, many of them in law enforcement, now believe the official 911 story is false, while the UK media and middle classes are some of the most gullible in the world. Sir Ian Blair, hated by senior police as the political stooge of his warmongering namesake, recently told a private meeting that the UK was headed for a "truly terrible" attack.

Was this speculation or inside knowledge? MI6 has many well documented links with "Al Qaeda", recently it was confirmed that top operative Omar Sheikh was working for them in Bosnia. The man named as the mastermind of 7/7 vanished abruptly when it was alleged he was on the MI6 payroll

IRAN

Israel and NATO are currently threatening Lebanon and Syria from the
Mediterranean while the US is sending out a new carrier group to threaten
Iran, with minesweepers to stymie any countermeasures in the event of open war. Meanwhile Russia, China and Iran are moving closer diplomatically and there are reports of joint manoevres. Germany and France could be trapped by NATO treaty obligations and forced to join a US/UK war against Syria, Iran and any other government that gets in their way including Russia or China.

Norman Solomon a respected and cautious leftist commentator in W ashington is the latest to raise the alarm: as a media expert he says the campaign of vilification against Iran is a strong indication that Bush plans to attack in due course. Claims that Bush and Rice wish for a peaceful solution are probably as true as similar claims which preceded the Iraq invasion: we now know they made a firm decision to attack over a year earlier. Shirley Williams, a cautious UK Libdem with good connections in the US puts, the chance of an attack at one in three.

In a complicated three way game the US refuses to negotiate with Iran, while manipulating the European negotiators to ensure no result is possible. The UN and Europe is being used to establish the idea that Iran is being unreasonable. Than they will be discarded when it comes to launching the attack.

In the UK Blair, surrounded by truly grotesque figures by now (even Jack
Straw had to be replaced by the pro-Isreal stalwart Margaret Beckett), would undoubtedly support another illegal attack. He could even use the crisis to renege on his promise to step down. Could Parliament rebel as it did against the nazi appeasers in 1939? Blair is certainly the Neville Chamberlain of the hour, but Gordon Brown is an unlikely Winston Churchill.

THE BIGGER PICTURE

All gloom and doom? No. On the tactical level, with awareness spreading that the official 911 story is far from the whole truth (even a senior BBC
correspondent conceded recently on the flagship News at Ten that Osama and Bush benefit each other), there is always the chance that a botched "Al Qaeda" attack will rebound against Bush and the two Blairs, as happened with the Madrid bombs.

On the strategic level, there could yet be a revolt in Washington. The
pro-Isreal lobby there has long had most senior politicians nailed down by
bribery and blackmail in much the same way that Lord Levy has New Labour in his pocket. However the survival instincts of the permanent bureaucracy, the military, and businesses outside the military industrial complex could still head off the drift to war.

There is a surprising parallel in history between the Third Reich in Russia
and the situation the US Empire now finds itself in in the Middle East.
(It's on record, by the way, that Hitler was a protege of the Bush dynasty,
who acted as the nazis bankers in the US and had assets seized as late as
1942 for trading with the enemy).

Hitler was stopped in Stalingrad, but it was weeks before the bone-headed
General Staff of the Wehrmacht even realised they were under siege. Rather than try to consolidate his position, Hitler, desperate for the oil that lay beyond Stalingrad, took his last big gamble and launched the biggest tank battle the world has ever seen at Kursk. He lost. The war was lost. But by the end, 30 million Russians and six million Jews had paid the price of the Bush family's flirtation with the Third Reich, Europe was rubble.

(After Kursk US/UK opened up the second front with the Normandy landings - delayed as long as possible while Russia bled. Terrified of Stalin's victorious armies, the Europeans welcomed the US as liberators but the Americans never went home. Stalin offered to withdraw and reunite Germany so long as it was neutral, but America turned the offer down. The modern American Empire was born.)

Back in the present, the smart money in the US knows that Iraq is the
Pentagon's Stalingrad. The career generals are screaming that the US has
lost the war there, but the Israeli-occupied media in London and Washington won't listen. The casualty figures look as massaged as they were in Vietnam.

Bankruptcy looms. For the first time in his long career, legendary investor
Warren Buffett (aka the sage of Omaha) is divesting out of dollars, George
Soros is betting against them. Why? Junk dollars are gushing out of
Washington, many into the private fortunes of the Bush circle via the
Pentagon, dollars that nobody except the Chinese and Japanese central banks, each for their own reasons, are willing to buy.

National bankruptcy was an early sign of the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Americans are beginning to notice that the Washington oligarchy is saddling them with an unbearable debt. Rumsfeld once observed that defence spending was not a cost but an investment, but for those not in oil or arms the planned "investment" in Iran looks like pouring good money after bad. People outside the old secessionist confederacy, in states like Vermont, are beginning to mutter that Washington needs them a lot more than they need Washington.

The US property boom, based on one percent interest rates, which has
sustained the economy since 2001 has already come to a shuddering halt as rates hit 5 percent. If the US attacks Iran, oil at $200 dollars a barrel
will force interest rates far higher.

Can these military and financial warnings affect the political bubble that
is Washington London and Tel Aviv in time to save Iran and Syria from more mass murder at the hands of the Empire? Would a Democrat victory next month in the mid terms stop Bush?

There is no policy difference between Washington Democrats and Washington Republicans: the bipartisan consensus on foreign policy is the political bedrock of the American Empire. However, there is one very important cultural difference: as Lyndon Johnson found in the riot torn sixties, Democrat warmongers cannot count on the loyalty of their grass roots.

Much as she would like to, President "let's be tougher on Iran" Hilary
Clinton would have far more difficulty waging war than resident "moderate
torture only" McCain. And much as they are in support of the "War on
Terror", a Democrat controlled Congress with subpoena powers would put the Republicans on the back foot and - unintentionally - be far less effective in suppressing the deadly testimony of 911 whistleblowers than a Republican controlled Congress has been.

If somehow the US elections can go ahead without being stolen again, if a
new "Al Qaeda" attack does not swing a terrified public back to the Fuhrer
in the White House, we could, just, be at the beginning of the end of the
long nightmare. Washington and London might yet choose to lose the war now rather than lose the war later.

LOSING THE WAR

But here is the problem. Losing a war is the most dangerous time for any
oligarchy. The truth about 911 will come out, as the truth of the Kennedy
assassination came out in the 1970's after Vietnam was over. Unlike the
Kennedy hit which could be dismissed as a mere palace coup, 911 has involved Washington conspirators conniving at the mass murder of Americans, not just to seize power but to abolish the constitution, start a war and loot the treasury. It has seen the corporate media wilfully ignoring the most obvious evidence the 911 story is false. There will be - is already - a wave of popular outrage in the US as conservatives and liberals and even the religious grassroots combine against the Washington oligarchy. For gamblers like the Bush mob an attack on Iran might look like the only way out.

For the United States, built on the genocide of American Indians and the
savagery of the Civil War, and feeding on blood ever since, dissolution
would be the best solution. If Washington is to survive at all there will
have to be major structural reforms like opening up the secret state to the
light of day, freeing journalists from know-it-all editors and meddling
proprietors, keeping money out of political campaigning and closing down
most of the Pentagon. There will have to be hundreds of prosecutions for
inciting and carrying out the criminal attack on Iraq and compounding that
with war crimes that would be heinous crimes even if the war had been legal. There will be dozens of prosecutions for complicity - at least - in the 911 attacks and dozens more for covering it up after the fact.

Overthrowing the demonic leaders in Washington and London, bringing the
military under political control, espousing reason and returning to a normal
democracy, a highly flawed but at least not a deranged democracy. Behaving like other post-imperial states - Spain, Sweden, Germany or Japan.

In the case of US/UK it'll be a shock, but that's what happens to empires
that start wars and lose them.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


PUBLIC MEETING
7pm on Monday 16 October
Function Room, The Counting House pub,
50 Cornhill, London EC3
nearest tube: Bank

Magic Bullet or Conspiracy Black Hole?
Should the Left Support the 911 Truth Movement?
Hugo Chavez does: should you?

Around 40% of Americans, including senior members of the military and
political establishment, now suspect that - in some way - 911 was an inside job. The official 911 story, put out by the CIA in the hours after the
attacks, has never been rigorously investigated. By now it has changed
several times and changed over fundamental issues.

The 911 attacks are the crown jewels of the "War on Terror", the invasion of Iraq and threatened invasion of Iran. They have spawned a political
atmosphere which has set back and even wrecked many of the Left's campaigns.

Ian Henshall, co-author of the best-selling "9/11 Revealed", will be giving
a talk followed by question and answer on the political issues raised by the
911 Truth movement and a brief survey of the evidence.

Also present will be Annie Machon, ex-MI5 officer, and Noel Glynn, Quaker
long time peace activist and an organiser of the UK 911 Truth Campaign.

Ian Henshall will say that the peace movement, the global justice movement and the Left can gain from helping to expose what could turn out to be the Washington scandal of the century, and offer a strategy for journalists and politicians who wish to get at the truth.

Believers in the official 911 story and those who think that trying to find
out the truth is a waste of time are particularly welcome to attend.

There will be an extensive question and answer session after the talk.

Entry Free