Book alleges Al Qaeda will attack US to ensure Bush win

[CShine]

In the past few months several books have been published that attack the US intelligence community, and the White House, for their alleged mistakes and misstatements about Iraq and the war on terror. Most of these books, the Guardian reports, have been written by "embittered" former officials.

But now, the newspaper reports, a senior US intelligence official is "about to publish a bitter condemnation of America's counter-terrorism policy, arguing that the West is losing the war against Al Qaeda and that an 'avaricious, premeditated, unprovoked' war in Iraq has played into Osama bin Laden's hands." This senior intelligence official, who writes as 'Anonymous,' also says that Osama bin Laden may attack the US before the November election to ensure the re-election of President George Bush."

Anonymous, who published an analysis of Al Qaeda last year, called Through Our Enemies' Eyes, thinks it quite possible that another devastating strike against the US could come during the election campaign, not with the intention of changing the administration, as was the case in the Madrid bombing, but of keeping the same one in place. "I'm very sure they can't have a better administration for them than the one they have now," he said. "One way to keep the Republicans in power is to mount an attack that would rally the country around the president."

"Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror" will be released in July. The Guardian notes that the fact that this author has been allowed to publish this work, and yet still remain a senior member of the US intelligence community, may "reflect the increasing frustration of senior intelligence officials at the course the administration has taken."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0621/dailyUpdate.html

[progressiveBadger]

1. Risky game Al Qaeda is playing...

what I THINK would happen would be that a majority of americans would wake up to the fact that Bush hasn't done ANYTHING to protect us, and elect Kerry. Two major terrorist actions in the US during Bush's watch? I think he would be finished.

[frylock]

2. that's a risk bushwa.. errrrrrrrrrrrrrr al-qaeda is willing to take..

they have nothing going for them at this point. Things are starting to look real bad for a shrub reselection, and desperate people take desperate actions when their backs are up against the wall.

[54anickel]

5. And didn't Tommy say another attack would result in Martial Law - no

reselection, period. Oh yeah, I think Shrubco...errr al-qaeda is more than willing to take that shot.

[Just Me]

8. Yes, and combined with the other extremes this administration,...

,...has been willing to venture,...the scenario of another major terrorist attack is very disconcerting. No matter what, I believe they would do whatever necessary to retain power.

[robertpaulsen]

18. He sure did.

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/211103martiallaw.html

snip

Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.

Discussing the hypothetical dangers posed to the U.S. in the wake of Sept. 11, Franks said that “the worst thing that could happen” is if terrorists acquire and then use a biological, chemical or nuclear weapon that inflicts heavy casualties.

If that happens, Franks said, “... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy.”

Martial fucking law. Are you ready for this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1825322

[54anickel]

20. Thanks for the links. I am a bit surprised by the number of DUers that

think it can't happen though. The nation was easily duped into accepting the Patriot Act and Homeland Security during the 9-11 shock induced stupor.

[Worst Username Ever]

3. Didn't work in Spain

People perceived that attack as a direct result of bungled ME policies and voted the incumbent out on his arse.

[MisterP]

7. well, it was primarily because the Anzar admin. lied its tail off

blaming ETA & ordering everyone to say it was ETA; that was the coup de grace

[Boomer]

9. And your point is what?

The Bush Administration lies are far worse and yet Americans have not reacted with a fraction of the indignation that was expressed by the Spanish. It appears that their democracy is more vigorous and authentic than ours.

As for what would happen after another major terrorist attack -- I tend to agree that it would only strengthen Bush's support or lead to martial law and an end-run around regime change here at home.

--Boomer

[Fovea]

16. Which nicely compares to Bush and Saddam.

n/t

[Art_from_Ark]

21. Um, given the 35 years of ETA terrorism in Spain

and the apparent lack of other terrorist players in the country, wouldn't it be NATURAL for the government to point the finger at the organization that would most likely be responsible for it?

[proud patriot]

4. I just sent this to Randi

A caller just mentioned this ..

[Stuckinthebush]

12. and she said that she had never heard of this line of thought

nor that Al-Qaeda had "endorsed" Bush. I think Randi needs to read more DU!

[CharlesGroce]

6. I think they'll

postpone the election, and get the Supreme Court to rule that it's okay for the president to do it (setting a much needed precident), and that John Kerry would probably allow it, much like Al Gore (and the rest of the Democratic leadership, including Kerry) did in 2000.

That's how I see it.

[EdGy]

10. AQ LOVES Bush

They could not hope for a more incompetent leader of the US who plays right into their hands.

Or maybe Bush is doing it on purpose because he NEEDS AQ and "terraists" cause it's his only hope to stay in power.

SO Bush and AQ are colluding and collaborating to prop each other up.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

11. Let's see how much play this gets in the media

My guess: none. But they don't mind reporting "speculation" that Al-Q hopes that Kerry will win the election. Bastards.

[Career Prole]

13. Why, that would be "caving in to the terrorists"!

Bushco has told us not to capitulate...

"Mr Bush did not refer to elections in Spain on Sunday…
…However, the BBC's Washington correspondent Rob Watson says there is no doubt the Bush administration has been stung by the results.
US administration officials say President Bush has already called several world leaders to insist they remain on the offensive in the war against terrorism.
And White House spokesman Scott McClellan cautioned Spaniards and others against sending a "terrible message" by letting terrorists influence their elections and policies.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3518128.stm

WASHINGTON — President Bush scolded Spain's new prime minister Monday for his swift withdrawal of troops from Iraq and told him to avoid actions that give "false comfort to terrorists or enemies of freedom in Iraq."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,117506,00.html

Seems to me since John Kerry is winning, then terra attack or no we should "stay the course". To allow the election to go to bush* because of a terra attack is giving in to Osama, and bush*, Uncle Dick, Rummy, and Scotty have all said it's wrong to let terra influence an election.
Terra or no terra, I won't be an "appeaser"...I'm voting for JK no matter what! :eyes:

[Cocoa]

14. I thought Osama already endorsed Kerry

I thought I heard that on CNN...

[Hoping4Change]

15. Bush has staked his presidency on making the US safer.

If the AQ strikes what does that say about the success of his efforts? Wasn't the 100 Billion dollar (and counting) war in Iraq supposed to make America secure?

Such a strike would simply provide incontrovertible evidence that money spent in Iraq should have been spent on homeland security!

[Warren DeMontague]

17. How about this line of reasoning...

If there is a terrorist attack and then Kerry actually wins (an unlikely result, to be sure-- I think it's pretty clear that all Bush and co. have to do is say the word "terror" and his poll #s go up) then the Bush thugs have all the more ammo to declare the election "invalid"-- just like they were apparently planning to do had Gore won the electoral, but not the popular vote..

You'd have millions of these "Sore Loserman" brownshirts screaming about how "Kerry only won because of the attack and the terrorists".. which gives them an excuse not to hand over power.

An extreme scenario, to be sure, but their history of anti-democratic behavior leads me to believe it can't be discounted completely.

[uptown ruler]

19. lies

Spreading The Word
The Irony Curtain Shop

[BadGimp]

22. this is all so much bull puckey

Please...total disinformation designed to justify actions taken by the Bush administration post any attack.