Yet he does not mention it.

I noticed this little story from the weekend in the Washington Times: US terror attack seen apt to follow '08 vote.

Here is the url: http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/

The author, Rowan Scarborough, has written some books. Amazon tells me that people who buy his books also buy books from John Bolton, Johan Goldberg, Robert Novak, Laura Ingraham and Norman Podhoretz. OK. Check. He is a neocon. Here's the description of his latest book (from Amazon):
Using his first-rate sources in all levels of national security-from field officers to high-ranking analysts to former intelligence heads-bestselling author Rowan Scarborough reveals how CIA bureaucrats are undermining President Bush and the War on Terror through disinformation, incompetence, and outright sabotage.
This is what he wrote this past weekend.

When the next president takes office in January, he or she will likely receive an intelligence brief warning that Islamic terrorists will attempt to exploit the transition in power by planning an attack on America, intelligence experts say.

After all, that is what happened to Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush at a time when their national security teams and their counterterrorism plans were in flux.

Islamic terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in February 1993, in Mr. Clinton's second month as president. Al Qaeda's Sept. 11 attacks came in the Bush presidency's first year. The strikes on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon happened as the White House national security director was formulating a comprehensive plan for combating Osama bin Laden's terror network, which had declared war on the United States.

The pattern is clear to some national security experts. Terrorists pay particular attention to a government in transition as the most opportune window to launch an attack.

"If I were asked by the newly elected president, I would strongly encourage him to be extremely vigilant during the transition period and within the first six months of his administration against an attack by al Qaeda on American interests at home or abroad," said Bart Bechtel, a retired CIA operations officer and assistant chief academic officer at Henley-Putnam University.

Mr. Bechtel said he thinks al Qaeda operatives will debate a future course based on who is elected.

Both Sens. Hillary Clinton and John McCain serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain, a former Navy fighter pilot, have had extensive exposure to military security issues.

Both have attacked first-term Sen. Barack Obama's ability to handle national security.

The message here is that terrorists attack during transition periods. Also, Al Qaeda, Islamic terrorists, Al Qaeda, terror, terror, 9/11, terror, terror, Osama Obama, terror terror terror.

Considering Mr. Scarborough's top-level access to national security sources and his affinity for the Bush Administration and neocons, let's note a few other points.

For example, the CIA has admitted that they made up Al Qaeda.

BBC’s killer documentary called “The Power of Nightmares“. Top CIA officials openly admit, Al-qaeda is a total and complete fabrication, never having existed at any time. The Bush administration needed a reason that complied with the Laws so they could go after “the bad guy of their choice” namely laws that had been set in place to protect us from mobs and “criminal organizations” such as the Mafia. They paid Jamal al Fadl, hundreds of thousands of dollars to back the U.S. Government’s story of Al-qaeda, a “group” or criminal organization they could “legally” go after. This video documentary is off the hook…

See Parts I and II here

Presumably Mr. Scarborough also knows this, since he has top-level access to national security sources and I am simply reading public source information on the internet. Yet he does not mention it.

In addition, an enormous body of scholarly work has built up around the unanswered questions of 9/11. Many theories have been advanced to answer all these officially unanswered questions, and these theories generally conclude (specifics vary) that 9/11 was an elaborate false flag operation blamed on Al Qaeda for the express purpose of starting wars to benefit Israel. It goes without saying that such an elaborate false flag operation cannot be conducted without the cooperation of elements in the intelligence community (the intelligence people Scarborough does not complain about in his book), in particular the CIA and Mossad.

Presumably Mr. Scarborough also knows this, since he has top-level access to national security sources and I am simply reading public source information on the internet. Yet he does not mention it.

Finally, on his last visit to Israel (this month), Israel's Army Radio reported that Bush said he would attack Iran before the end of his term. This news was broadcast throughout Israel and was then vigorously denied by the White House. Of course, the blogosphere buzzed about this all last week, weighing the possibilities that this could happen and reading the mysterious tea leaves. Jim Lobe, a highly respected foreign policy analyst, had sources tell him that the attack would take place between the November elections and the time Bush leaves office in January. This amazing prediction has direct bearing on Mr. Scarborough's story.
This individual (whose name I can’t divulge at the source’s insistence) recently told my source that such an attack would take place between the November elections and Bush’s departure and that it would be “massive.” I subsequently heard from a knowledgeable Israeli source that he had recently heard the same scenario from two of his sources in Israel.
Presumably Mr. Scarborough also knows this, since he has top-level access to national security sources and I am simply reading public source information on the internet. Yet he does not mention it.

Why do we need people like Mr. Scarborough reporting to us that our intelligence community believes the Islamic terrorists will attack the United States at presidential transition time? We already know who the terrorists are, and we already know what they're capable of, and they've already told us approximately when to expect the next attack. If his sources in the intelligence community are so smart to predict this pattern, then why don't they just use all those billions we give them to stop the evil terrorists. Hmm? They don't do that because they are the terrorists, and Mr. Scarborough is one of their corporate media tools.


malcontent said...

Rowan is a partisan hack perpetuating a new chapter in the ongoing saga known as

"Stabbed In The Back"

He proclaimed doom and gloom when Clinton was driving the War Bus here:



Now that his fellow thugs are losing grip on the Bus' Steering Wheel 'o Justice he's laying blame on those non-Neocons who would dare to contest his comrades' judgement.

A. Peasant said...

The Poor Man used to do awards for people like this. The Palm d'Hair and the Wank of the Year. Remember that? Too funny. I really miss him.

Pete said...

There have been a few people who would be in the know (Joe Biden and Colin Powell included) who have mentioned something in passing about some major incident around MLK day right after Obama takes office. Of course there is a lot of serious web discussion about this. But why should we believe it? For one, why the leaks, and why are they only these passing comments, not even reported the next day? I think it is more likely that whatever is to happen is minor if anything. Instead it smells more like psyops against bloggers who pounce on these things. So when the web would have you believe something big is about to go down, in contrast to the mainstream media mentioning nothing, a situation is set up to marginalize the credibility of those who get this wrong. The other question is, what now would be the purpose of some major event, especially having leaked it would happen?

A. Peasant said...

The only wrinkle is that Biden's original comments were recorded from a private reception. When it surfaced Obama had to brush it all off as figures of speech. So I'm not sure that he meant to plant that.

But that aside, your point is taken. Many false leads are thrown out there for bloggers to chase down for nothing. And certainly, many times things have been predicted that never happened. It's sort of a chicken and egg problem. We don't know if digging around alters their plans, but I have to think that sometimes it does. I think they keep having to kick the can down the road, and then things change, and they have to kick it again. Hopefully we can run the clock out this way.

legal mumbo jumbo

Disclaimer: The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.