Brace Yourself For Another 9/11

[Karmageddon]

Brace Yourself For Another 9/11

President Bush is in trouble. His poll numbers are down miserably. His agenda items are stagnant. The American public is squarely against him. Karl Rove has been fingered for the Valerie Plame outing. Scandals are starting to catch up with him. And, he & his administration are poised to go down in shame. Bush’s war of aggression in Iraq is not going well, and all branches of the military are having trouble recruiting. There’s no way Bush will get support for invading Iran (which we know he wants to do)… unless… there’s another 9/11.

Bush needs another terrorist event on American soil in order to garner support for his imperialist agenda. So, you heard it here first… I predict another 9/11 within the next 2 years. Couldn’t tell you when, where, or how. But, I can tell you why - because Bush needs it.

(Continued at http://dubyad40.com/html/guests/scott07082005.html )

[andyhappy]

1. love your 'handle'

very clever!

Welcome to the DU!

[Karmageddon]

25. Thanks. And thanks for the welcome here.

[Deja Q]

2. But will people believe it this time? Even I, a cynic of cynics, doubt it

[Nite Owl]

10. Well it seems that they

are already setting it up to blame it on the'liberals' anyway for not following dear leader. Will it work, I don't think so because say what they will it isn't just liberals who disagree with him anymore.

[Karmageddon]

27. Some will believe it, some won't. It will be our job to convince people.

There is certainly no shortage of stupidity (or at least ignorance) in this country. And our (ahem) free press certainly isn't doing it's part to alleviate that situation.

If it does happen, you know the media will rally around the idiot, and so will the freepers. We'll just have to keep reminding them to "explain to us how bush made us safer again."

My personal bet is an explosion at a chemical plant or on a railroad car carrying chemicals in or upwind from a major metro area. I say that because of the devastation it would cause and how easy it would be to do.

Scares the crap out of me that our (ahem) leaders are doing nothing to address these vulnerabilities, and that nobody seems to give a rats ass.

[Beaver Tail]

3. I think another 9/11 would be too obvious

and people would really start to wonder what the hell is going on.

[BuyingThyme]

16. How 'bout a

9/12?

[aquart]

23. That's why I think it happened in London.

A reminder, yet not a rebuke. George is still keeping Americans safe, but what if he weren't here?

I am the FIRST to attack others for the racism of thinking Muslims aren't capable of plotting successful attacks without the aid of the CIA or some other bizarre and covert organization...but when George dipped under 50%, I remember thinking something would explode, but that it might backfire if it were on American soil.

So now something has exploded and it was NOT on American soil, but that of our closest ally.

And it's not like these entitled asses are above murdering innocent people.

So, to me, it's a toss up who did it. And, unless it's our guys, I don't much care.

Terrorists are cockroaches. There will always be cockroaches. When cockroaches get into a kitchen, you don't blame the cockroach. You blame the housekeeper.

[Beaver Tail]

4. DUPE

[ewagner]

5. Welcome to DU

:hi:

[Richardo]

6. Won't work this time...Murka is supposed to be safer now.

Now if there were a large attack in another country, a staunch ally, let's say....Hm.

[JRob]

13. right and yesterday's attack has already created a media vacuume...

[porphyrian]

7. Nah, I don't buy it.

Not that they wouldn't in a second, but I think that if they could have, they would have done it here instead of England.

[oregonjen]

8. However, because we haven't had an attack here since 9/11

be the reason his numbers on terrorism remain higher than his approval overall? Should there be another attack, he can no longer claim he has kept our country safe. Keep the sheeple scared, but no attacks here. What do you think?

[amazona]

17. we HAVE had attacks here

It is simply that no one cares anymore unless it's a huge, huge spectacular attack.

Anthrax? The first biological attack on U.S. soil...and it's a big "who cares" apparently. That was October 2001.

American Airlines 587...but the plane was packed with Dominicans so let's sweep that one under the rug too. November 2001.

There are more, such as the airport shootings at LAX and MSY but I'm too tired to even think of them right now.

I'm tired of hearing the claim that there were no attacks since 9-11, to me it's dismissive of the dead, especially those killed in the anthrax attacks, which seems to have been completely swept under the rug, with no prosecution at all of a very obvious potential suspect.

[JRob]

20. control the media, control the message.

[Marnieworld]

21. Don't forget Bali and Madrid

There have been plenty of terror attacks every day in Iraq too. It's disgusting how people forget.

[sleipnir]

24. AA 587 was NOT terrorism. It was capitalist greed.

Poor maintenance coupled with too many takeoffs scheduled in an hour caused it to go down.

The real problem was it took off to close to a 747, the wake from such a massive plane was still effective in the air and when you add in poor maintenance on that specific aircraft, down it went.

This is a chronic problem with NYC airports, they're trying to launch too many planes in too little time. "Close calls" are up by record numbers this year.

[aquart]

29. That's the problem with a spectacular attack.

Yes, 9/11 was great for recruiting (and it was also fabulous for George) but, unless you can top it, anything you do afterward is just so what? Big deal. That's the best you can do? Anything less FAILS TO TERRIFY. In fact, it has the opposite effect. We lived thru 9/11, you expect us to get all scared of THIS? Piffle!

Look at the Brits. London did the Blitz. THE BLITZ. They would be embarrassed to crack over anything as trifling at this. Someone posted somewhere that the book of War of the Worlds shows how a civilization can crumble with just two attacks. London took a lot more than two. Tel Aviv and Jerusalem can tell you that you don't crack, but you may get testy. Terrorism is a strain, all right. I was mugged three times while I lived in Brooklyn. I had NO idea how frightened I was until I moved away and the weight slipped off my shoulders. Survival instinct will keep us moving, return us to whatever routine we can muster no matter what the horror.

9/11 was traumatizing because of its rarity. Make it common and we'll just step over the bodies to get to work.

[RaleighNCDUer]

30. Wasn't it proved that the anthrax was a strain that was only

available to government researchers?

Kind of rules out Muslim terrorists, doesn't it?

[paparush]

39. Ka CHING! We have a winner! n/t

[Media_Lies_Daily]

34. Let's take a look at those other "terrorist attacks"....

1. Anthrax - If those attacks had been launched by Al Qaeda, how come their targets in Congress were Democrats, only? Who gained from those attacks?

2. AA 587 - I followed that pretty closely and I've been convinced that the rudder had a catastrophic failure.

3. Shootings at LAX and MSY were random attacks by people who had gone off the deep end.

Sorry, but there have been NO terrorist attacks on U. S. soil since 911.

[LeftyMom]

35. 1. Is still terror, just domestic terror nt

[JackRiddler]

37. Um,

Why isn't the anthrax attack "terrorist"? It attacked unarmed civilians to achieve general terror for a clear political end. Isn't that the classical definition?

Or do you mean that it has to be by "al Qaeda" to qualify as terrorist?

In that case, since "al Qaeda" was merely an accomplice to 9/11 if even that, there have been no terrorist attacks in the United States this century.

[catzies]

46. Suspicious fire July 5 at a Florida repro health clinic IS terrorism too!

But they're just targeting sluts so let's sweep that one under the rug too.

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/07/05/clinic.fire.ap/

[JRob]

19. it's the only thing keeping his numbers from hitting the basement.

The only advantage for allowing/staging another attack would be to provide the excuse for Martial Law.

[Grateful for Hope]

31. I agree with you

His justification for continued occupation in Iraq would be blown. And, he would set himself for his critics to point out loud and clear that he is not keeping us safe.

[JRob]

9. At this point it's questionable whether that would help or hurt his case

unless of course Martial Law is declaired...

[amazona]

11. why borrow trouble?

Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof, thank you.

[justinsb]

12. Even assuming that all the conspiracy theories are wrong...

I'd say a US target would be the next likely piece in the pattern:

9/11 attack on US symbols of power

Bali - revenge on Australia for joining US

Madrid - message sent to spain 2 weeks before an election that will determine their participation in Iraq

London (if it was in fact Al Queda): Attack on staunch US ally during the G8, right after Bush makes 'fighting them over there' speech.

All of the targets to date have been strategic, the next likely move would be to prove Bush wrong on his home soil.

[Zenlitened]

14. Agreed. No need to believe in MIHOP. Bush's sheer incompetence...

... places us in plenty of danger as it is.

:scared:

[ClintonTyree]

15. I sincerely hope you're wrong....

but knowing the bush cabal's lack of integrity and morals I believe you could be correct. These people have no conscience when it comes to innocent life, their agenda is first and foremost and anyone caught in the way is considered "collateral damage".

I hope we can get through the rest of the giggling murder monkey's term without having another catastrophic event such as 9/11. The poll numbers suggest otherwise though, as you pointed out. In order to achieve the rest of his twisted agenda, something will have to happen. Heaven help those in the way when it does.

[CJCRANE]

18. Don't think it'll happen.

The whole planes & skyscrapers & 9/11 date have given Bush a "brand" he can constantly invoke (even to the point of having subliminal 911 flags as the Fort Bragg backdrop). Neither al-Qaeda nor Bush could top 9/11 for symbolism or marketability.

[RaleighNCDUer]

32. Oh?

How about a former-Soviet battlefield nuke artillery shell, shipped into Seattle in a container from Asia? Wipe out a square mile around the docks, and you have your incident and instant recruiting to take the war to Iran.

911 is a failing brand. When a brand begins to lose its luster you replace it immediately, you don't stick with it as you lose market share.

(If you haven't guessed, I'm strongly MIHOP)

[CJCRANE]

33. Possible

The neocons don't seem to have any other products to sell apart from war and redistribution of wealth (TO the wealthy) so I guess they may figure it's time to upgrade their flagship brand.

[Sparkly]

40. That's my prediction, as well.

(But I think Syria would come before Iran.)

Meanwhile, an attack from a port would stop shipments in and out until they can finally establish a means of checking cargo -- in their usual M.O. of locking the barn door after the horse has escaped.

Think about what THAT would do to our economy, re: imports/exports.

[RaleighNCDUer]

42. No kidding.

And, BTW, I also think it will be Syria first - Iran is the longer term goal. PNAC will want to control Syria to have a pipeline for Iraqi oil before they try Iran, and Iran shuts down the Straits of Hormuz.

[jojo54]

22. I agree.

He can't have another MIHOP because this time, I think there would be too many questions. The opposition would be ready and the MSM would be all over it (this time they would - they have to cover their asses too).

[NYC Liberal]

26. Maybe but I don't think so because....

To say that Bush would pull off another 9.11 because of sagging poll numbers is to say he gives a shit in the first place about what people think. He doesn't.

Before the election, he HAD to at least show some semblance of concern for what most people wanted..obviously. Now, however, he's in for 4 years and he doesn't care.

[Karmageddon]

28. This would get him into Iran, and help the rest of his agenda.

You know, dismantling social security, etc., and turning this country back to the robber-baron days of the 1900's, where the filthy rich are even more filthy rich, and the rest of us poor slobs are happy just to have some kind of job so we can feed our families.

[iconoclastic cat]

36. Some of the formatting is off on your blog page.

The text runs off the bottom of the main frame.

[mzmolly]

38. Welcome to DU.

If we have another 911, and Democrats fail to effectively call Bush on his failure to "prevent" it, I'm out personally.

[Generator]

41. I've braced myself for it everyday since 9/11/2001 thankyou very much

First, because I was afraid of the terrorists. Now, because I'm afraid of the terrorists and the monsters in our goverment that not only do I not trust to protect us or have any vision in changing this horrible new world, I also continually suspect them of having their hand in everything.

I really expected it by 9/11/2002. Didn't happen. Started to breathe easier.

All of last year..there was 3/11 and it was horrifying and I expected something here before the election. Nothing. When 11/2 came and I believed we were going to win the election but damn it all (RIP) Andy was right. It's all a fraud. They don't need terror anymore they have the machines.

Except for (thought he was DEAD) Osama appearing miraculously on the FRIDAY before the election with all the left wing talking points.

I woke up last morning and something had happened...and suspiciously it's so NEAR the spot of the Downing Street minutes the only thing that hast threatened to really touch Bush.

I'm of two minds. And yes it does drive one nuts. Either, our precious evil government is so close to the terrorists that we actually are safe because nothing will happen unless they "need" it too. Or they are so incompetent it certainly seems a miracle that nothing HAS happened, thereby pointing to their very said involement.

Frankly, I suspect them to let something happen any day now. Why not? It would be the end of America. One little suitcase nuke and there will be no freedom left. Can you imagine how easily our freedoms would be sold for SAFETY? How many wars they could justify with that?Oh happy day. I do pray that America really is blessed as all the politicians never tire of saying because that I think ( a higher power I only sometimes believe in) is all we have to keep us safe.

[HughBeaumont]

43. Not on your life.

You think Lancelot Link is going to go down as the Preznit who had not ONE but DEUX "terrs'tacks" on US soil? We're safe as kittens. Another terrs'tack would KILL him in the history books and send this administration down in flames. He has not one noteable accomplishment as it is and his administration is rife with scandal; the only fumes he's running on is this "moral" and "character" horseshit the Reich Wing keeps glossing him with.

Not to mention Beaver and Hypno's point about it would be just WAY too damned obvious in the face of all the damning evidence about their possible role in 9/11. Not even the biggest Bush-sucking jackass is that stupid . . .oh wait, yes he is.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

44. au contraire

his pig-fucking base likes nothing more than a little carnage in the streets. to them, the carnage is a sign of Bush's resolve. I know, i don't get it either but there it is.

[Trailrider1951]

45. After reading all these replies, there is one thing I have to say

and that is this: that the only scenario that would bring about martial law, re-consolidation of PNAC's power, and rally the sheeple behind them is a catastrophic attack that would take out.....well, a certain person in high office, but one who only a figurehead for those men in power behind the curtain. Enough said.