This just scared the H#!! out of me..

[Blue Diadem]

http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a1247.htm

I've read this site for months now, never really knowing if this person is for real or not. Now there's supposed to be documents posted on Monday!

[Straight Shooter]

1. The gentleman who operates the site goes by the name Walter Storch

He is fascinatingly articulate, impressively well-read, and he has a redhot laser focus on bush in the Monkey Palace, as he refers to it.

He can unleash a diatribe on Little Boots such that it makes Linda Blair in the Exorcist look like Pollyanna by comparison.

[berni_mccoy]

2. Very scary indeed... looking forward to the release on Monday (eom)

[shraby]

4. What's his accuracy rate?

[m berst]

8. good question

I have been reading these for about a year I guess, and I think they are good reading. They capture a feel for what it could be like in the WH. I have always seen them as fiction and not a factual account. They could be, but there is no evidence for that one way or the other that I have ever seen. That doesn't mean they are worthless, because I think that they serve the purpose of getting people to think about what it might be like in this administration.

I would not treat these as a factual source.

[DemBones DemBones]

3. I've said for the past twenty-five years or more that

stopping smallpox vaccination was a BIG mistake.

[Skink]

5. Gulp

:scared:

[yellowdogintexas]

6. I am old enough that I have been vaccinated, twice actually

because I went overseas when it was still a requirement so I had a booster at age 11. More than likely if this did come about I would have a light case or not be ill at all.

Not to discount the scariness of this, if it should happen. I never understood why the smallpox immunization was stopped. I haven't noticed that the polio vaccine has been stopped, just because they haven't had any new cases in x number of years.

My youngest sister was immunized in 1962; I don't know when they stopped giving them. My daughter was breast fed, and hopefully got some of my antibodies.

[seabeyond]

7. just a bit of info i googled

MOST AMERICANS CAN'T RECEIVE SMALLPOX VACCINE

A major blow to the best laid plans of the New Vaccinators came on 10 Sept 02 with the Reuters article <1> about the CDC announcing how the new smallpox vaccine is not to be recommended for:

- HIV people
- anyone on immunosuppressive drugs
- anyone with eczema
The CDC quoted a new study in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, describing reactions that include blindness, scarring, and death. <31> So the vaccine is therefore contraindicated in all these cases, according to the CDC.

Eczema patients alone comprise half the US population. AIDS patients and those on immunosuppressive drugs add another significant proportion to the group of those who shouldn't be vaccinated.

In addition, the omniscient media seem to have forgotten that most Americans over 31 years of age have already been vaccinated for smallpox, since the vaccine was only halted in 1971 in the US. Remember? So if the vaccine is supposed to work, then obviously these people will not need a new shot, right?

Then who does that leave? Ten percent of the population would be a reasonable estimate.

It's not much of a stretch to see how the threat of smallpox is a marketing tool, right out of classic Bernays Public Relations 101, that is being used to justify paying vaccine manufacturers $800 million for a vaccine that is unproven, untested, and contraindicated for 90% of the population.

Why then are our new masters shrieking about the 280 million doses we need to protect the American people from this imminent bioterrorist threat?

[necso]

9. Yes, this is scary stuff,

but the neocons are scary people... It is really too bad to have to rely on the non-mainstream press.

And the stuff about Iran reads pretty true -- provided that our "leadership" is of questionable judgment.

I would point out that an invasion of Iran has to take place from somewhere, and Iraq is a good candidate. So troop "withdrawal" perhaps should be replaced by "disengagement". But this "slip" would be consistent with the sort of loose talking that takes places in circles unfamiliar with military affairs (like our "leadership" -- or the "press"). (Or it could be deliberate disinformation, as in: when the troops aren't withdrawn, everybody "relaxes" -- who knows.)

It is hard to judge the seriousness of the mentioned joint US-Israeli strikes. There appears to have been some concern about this pre-election (at least) overseas... and the Iranian military "exercises" that supposedly have taken place (or are in progress) may not be an entire coincidence (but useful information is at a premium these days).

However, with the expected difficulties that an invasion of Iran will bring about with Iraq's Shia population, one can imagine that a more secure supply route than the present one will be desired -- at least in some circles within the military. There is also the vulnerability of the current supply route to Iranian interdiction to consider.

The question is how a less vulnerable supply route can be created. The best route would appear to be through through Turkey and the relatively secure Kurdish areas in Northern Iraq. There are diplomatic obstacles to this currently, but these might be mitigated somewhat by another "incident". Of course Syria might be invaded first, but there are difficulties to be expected in clearing any such route -- and maintaining its security.

Midyear 2005 as a date to start massing for an attack on Iran does seem reasonable -- this would allow for an attack when the weather cools, say late 2005 or early 2006.

There is also the question of how all this might be "sold" to the American people -- which brings us to the latter part of the article. Some people have hypothesized that after another "terrorist" attack, particularly a serious one, almost anything could be sold to the American people -- and many of our "allies".

And smallpox is certainly a weapon of great terror -- reading a little history will tell of the horror with which our ancestors perceived this (then at least) very real threat... But a much smaller "incident" (than that discussed) might "rouse" the American people to support any attack against the "perpetrators" identified as the source of the "incident".

As to the "spy investigation", I believe that the current investigation about the alleged "spying" (for Israel) is going nowhere -- except, perhaps, to try to nail some scapegoat (entirely innocent or otherwise -- remember Hatfill) -- along with all the other "ongoing investigations". And while I hate referencing the "moonie times", the following article states that: "a confessed Pentagon spy has stopped cooperating with federal law enforcement officials" -- which is an interesting claim. Note that the article also claims that the investigation "has intensified".

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20041208-045115-7516r.htm

Whether or not the originally referenced article is (overall) psy-war or disinformation (really just a form of psy-war) is hard to say. There are elements that sound very real -- but this is standard "ops" stuff -- as is "stretching" the claims, either to discredit the valid parts, or to make the actual happenings seem less terrible. -- The problem is that without "good data" it is very difficult to sort out the "wheat" from the "chaff".

It is worth noting that the neocons "cut their teeth" on the cold war and many still harbor black feelings towards the Soviet inheritor, Russia. -- One does hear the occassional rumbling from Russia about outside meddling.

The pro-Israeli predisposition (perhaps "fanaticism" is more accurate) of many neocons is also worth noting.

And there is North Korea to consider.