think tanks: where experts go to reverse engineer plans for world domination

At think tanks, experts figure out how to get from point A to point B. First they decide on point B, and then they reverse engineer how to arrive there from point A. When insiders do this, they call it "brainstorming" or "war games" or "simulations." When outsiders do this, they call it "terrorism."

^^^^^^^

The exposure of military plots in Turkey has finally gained momentum, after several weeks. This morning we learn of over 50 arrests of current and retired military officers in connection with the alleged Ergenekon coup plots: Sledgehammer and Cage.

Former Naval Forces Adm. Özden Örnek kept detailed journals between 2000-2004 on some of the plans.

Naturally, some of the plotting came under cover of think tanks , including the General Staff's Strategic Research and Study Center (SAREM), a foundation affiliated with the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK). 

The Sledgehammer plan, revealed in January by a Turkish newspaper, was more than simply an outline of a plan to kill or injure various bureaucrats, journalists and the government. It included a plot to bomb one of İstanbul’s largest mosques during Friday prayer and a subplot named Oraj (Thunderstorm) that called for the deliberate downing of a Turkish jet to trigger problems with Greece, which the conspirators hoped would give the army the upper hand in politics as the public would feel threatened by a foreign enemy.

Police said the operation yesterday was launched when the National Police Department’s criminal investigations department examined and verified the authenticity of documents regarding the Sledgehammer and Cage plans. The original documents were handed to the Ergenekon prosecutors by the Taraf daily, which exposed both plans.

^^^^^^^

In 2007, the director of SAREM and several other accused Turkish military people met with the Hudson Institute to "brainstorm." The Hudson Institute is a very prestigious US think tank where very important and surely very well-paid experts work, in Washington DC and NY, to help devise policies and solve problems facing the world.

In the meeting, participants had discussed the outcomes of possible scenarios in Turkey, including increased terrorist attacks killing 50 people in İstanbul and the assassination of the former head of the Constitutional Court, Tülay Tuğcu, by a suicide bomber. Sources confirmed that Gen. Tanyeri and military attaché Brig. Gen. Bertan Nogaylaroğlu participated in the meeting.

This is one of the scenarios discussed, my comments in green:

• On June 18, a suicide bomber attacks a police station in Beyoğlu, Istanbul. Fifty, including police officers, tourists and shoppers, are dead and 200 are wounded.  [who directs the suicide bomber?]
• Rumors indicate that the PKK perpetrated the attack. [who starts the rumors?]
• One day later, the Interior Ministry announces the attacker was trained in northern Iraq by the PKK. [false flag set, the attack could now be blamed on the desired party: PKK, according to people inside government?]
• Chief of General Staff Gen. Büyükanıt says the terrorist PKK will continue carrying out attacks on big cities. [and how does he know what the PKK will do?]
• He makes the call for an immediate military operation into northern Iraq. [one of the goals?]
• The US State Department calls for calm. [working both sides, manipulating emotions?]
• On June 23, Iran announces that the PKK attacked trucks carrying supplies to Syria inside its borders and alleges that the PKK was previously instructed by the US to carry out this attack. [which will be denied, and the media will spin it as paranoid?]
• Fueled by the attack, the Tehran administration offers Turkey a joint military operation against the PKK. [taking the bait?]
• On June 24, former chief justice of the Turkish Constitutional Court Tülay Tuğcu is assassinated. Tuğcu is taken to the hospital in critical condition and dies there the next day. [a week later, goosing the situation to the next level, and who directs the assassin?]
• Preliminary investigations reveal that the bomb used in the assassination is the same type as the one detonated in Beyoğlu. [naturally, it's the same people?]
• On June 25, the Interior Ministry and General Staff announce the involvement of the PKK in the incident. [as they well know, since it's really them?]
• Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan decides on a military operation in northern Iraq. [the desired reaction, drawing Turkey into the conflict?]
• On June 29, the Turkish Army enters northern Iraq. The Baghdad administration strongly reacts to the operation. [escalation?]
• The US State Department underlines the operation will undermine Turkey’s security, as the White House notes Turkey has the right to defend itself.” [whose favorite phrase?]

The end result of this scenario being that Turkey and Iran have now been drawn into northern Iraq, it all gets blamed on the PKK terrorists. Regrettable. Sure thing.

^^^^^^^

And here's a war-game scenario about Israel attacking Iran reported on this week, from another US think tank: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/02/21/87061/war-game-shows-how-attacking-iran.html. The scenario shows how "unintended consequences can spin out of control." The only trouble is the entire thing is based on false assumptions and innuendo.

With diplomacy failing and precious intelligence just received about two new secret Iranian nuclear facilities, Israel launches a pre-emptive strike against Tehran's nuclear complex. The strike is successful, wiping out six of Iran's key sites and setting back its suspected quest for a bomb by years.

Would honest diplomacy fail? Probably not. The Iranians haven't started a war in a couple hundred years. So, bad assumption. Also, no actual evidence of Iran's secret nuclear facilities has ever been put forth. None. Nothing but innuendo, and yet that did not stop the Saban Center for Mideast Policy, part of the Bookings Institution, to run a war-games scenario, which ends up in disaster. What a bummer for them.

Some members of the "Israeli" team nonetheless felt that setting back Iran's nuclear program "was worth it, even given what was a pretty robust response," said one participant. He asked that his name not be used, because under the game's ground rules, participants are supposed to remain anonymous.

Yes, I bet they would like to remain anonymous, considering what they really seem to be doing. Considering that they considered it "worth it" to set back a nuclear program for which no evidence exists.

The Brookings war game was one of three simulations regarding Iran's nuclear program conducted in December. The other two, at Harvard University and Tel Aviv University, reportedly found that neither sanctions nor threats dissuaded Tehran from its suspected nuclear weapons ambitions.

Again, the "suspected" ambitions don't exist of course. But by never acknowledging that fact, Tehran can never be dissuaded from their imaginary ambitions, so that our experts may continue to justify all this fluffy frosting of lies as they try to reverse engineer some series of events that will result in point B: Israel's continued hegemony over the world and a defeated Iran, hmm?

In the Brookings game, three teams of experts, including former senior U.S. officials, played the Israeli, Iranian and American leadership. They assembled in separate rooms at the think tank's Washington headquarters. Israeli and U.S. "officials" communicated with each other, but not with the Iranians.

One of the simulation's major findings was how aggressively the Iranians responded to the attack — more aggressively, some participants felt, than they would in real life — and how Washington and Tehran, lacking direct communication, misunderstood each other.

And no you may NOT know who got to "play" the Iranians or anyone else in this game, as these demented people plot -- oh, I'm sorry, "brainstorm." And look at all the comments. People will take this all very seriously when we should be pulling the rug right out from under their feet since the entire thing rests on LIES about Iran's "suspected" nuclear program. Why are think tanks discussing a strike at all? What a diabolical waste of time. It appears they want to creates a reality out of thin air, for Israel. And if lots and lots of people have to die to make that happen, which they would, well, "so be it" seems to be the attitude from the people at the think tanks who consider the cost "worth it."

^^^^^^^

No surprise really. Look at the man who founded the Hudson Institute, Herman Kohn. A few facts about this monster from Wikipedia:

1. Born in Bayonne, New Jersey, Kahn grew up in a Jewish family in the Bronx, then in Los Angeles following his parents' divorce.
2. Like many of his colleagues at RAND, he had little personal experience of warfare.
3. Kahn's major contributions were the several strategies he developed during the Cold War to contemplate "the unthinkable", namely, nuclear warfare, by using applications of game theory....Whether hundreds of millions died or "merely" a few major cities were destroyed, Kahn argued, life would in fact go on.

1975, in Vancouver, Mr. Robyn Williams arranges a meeting with Kahn to discuss nuclear arms:

I had taken the trouble to write to Khan in advance at the Hudson Institute where he was based and received a courteous reply. ...He opened the door, wearing only boxer shorts. With another man that would, perhaps, have been unremarkable. But Khan was immense and spectacularly hirsute. He repaired back to his made-up bed where he had obviously been sitting, eating grapes. He lifted a large bunch and nibbled them like Nero at a Roman banquet. To my great relief, I was not invited to share the feast.

Herman Kahn was a giant. He boldly confronted public issues with creativity and the conviction, in his case correct, that thought and analysis could help make ours a better world. ~ Donald Rumsfeld 

 

^^^^^^^

You can read more details of the Hudson Institute meeting here.

Sources confirm that various Turkish military officials and civilian experts, the Hudson Institute’s Turkey expert Zeyno Baran, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani’s son Kubat Talabani, as well as Brig. Gen. Suha Tanyeri and military attaché Brig. Gen. Bertan Nogaylaroğlu participated in the meeting.


The invitation outlines the meeting sessions with headlines translated into Turkish as “Introduction,” “The Scenario,” “Questions” and “Wildcard.” 


Potential Wildcards

• 
  

  A new set of clues indicates that the suicide terrorist who attacked the police station in Beyoğlu was trained by Hezbollah in a Syrian camp. 

• 
  

  In a raid near Kandil Mountain, Turkish security forces confiscate two-year-old MOSSAD training manuals and videos showing Israeli agents side by side with the PKK militants.

• 
  

  A Peshmerga unit on patrol in northern Iraq panics and attacks a group of Turkish Special Forces. After the battle, it is revealed that one of the gunned-down Peshmerga is, in fact, an American soldier who was training the Kurdish militia. This soldier, however, was not authorized to be on patrol with the Peshmerga.

Well I guess they have to plan for everything, even maybe getting caught? Yes a few people on the front lines sometimes go "rogue," it's very regrettable. Tsk tsk. But you know, should any of these scenarios cooked up at think tanks ever go live, don't expect any of those experts to be held accountable for the planning. That would just be a coincidence. In fact, you will probably see them paraded across teevee as even greater experts for having predicted what happened in advance.

Like this one: she's a star.

 

Zeyno Baran, Hudson Institute

nice necklace