Oh, good gracious! This post is a mess. I'll leave it alone temporarily, except to remove a particularly unkind swipe at someone who didn't, uh, specifically, invite it.
One of the nice things about this place is that people have a fairly broad tolerance for others' ideas. You'll forgive me if I don't buy into many of the theories posted in this section of DU. By the same token, I think that I may have finally pieced together a reasonable prediction of the Bush Administration plan for this election year. I'd like to put it down in print before it happens.
I'm working from the following angle. I believe that this is one of the very most incompetent administrations to disgrace this nation in modern times. I also firmly believe that by placing faith in a power higher than the law of the land, those people are far less compelled to follow the rule of law than many previous administrations. Like all presidential administrations, they are possessed by self interest which naturally competes with the good of the American people. And unlike any administration since I don't know when, those people are pushing the very limits of H.L. Mencken's maxim that nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.
The classic rebuttal to any shrill rant about the government is that you cannot simultaneously accuse it of evil genius and incompetence.
But I don't think it's unreasonable at all to see a combination of incompetence, selfish political intent, and confidence in the ability to mislead the public. Election postponement is only one potential part of a far larger plan to try to use anything "the terra-ists" try to do to reinforce their own poorly conceived plan of disinformation and fear management.
Forgive the long prologue. Here's what I think is going on.
* There's really only four major possibilities regarding the former boogeyman, Osama bin Laden's current state: he's dead; he's captured; he's loose; or he's holed up in a very specific place in the mountains in Afghanistan. As I hope I will show below, I think the last possibility is the best case.
* When we rolled over that Pakistani scientist who was selling nuclear tips all over Hell's half acre, that provided the United States with enough grease to get our "friend" Pervez Musharraf to park a division or two of troops along the section of border where Osama is thought to be, with an international contingent cutting off the Afghani side. As I recall,
only a couple of weeks ago Pakistan was being prodded to commence a major operation to rub out Osama. I think plan A is to catch or kill Osama and announce it on Monday, July 26, best to deflate the opening day of the Democratic Convention. I've been predicting this for over a year now, but now I think this isn't all that's in store.
* Unfortunately for the Administration here in America, they have a major problem in that the last big lie they sold to the American people--that Saddam and Osama are somehow directly related--is wearing thin without some new, solid, spectacular information. But the original ruse worked well and for a long time, and those people have contempt for the average American's power of reasoning, and they were not bright enough to tell the truth then and they don't dare do it now. Thus, plan B.
* There probably
is a connection between Iraq and al Qaeda. Again, unfortunately for those people in Washington, the connection is an embarassing one. Ever since GW I, Kurdish Iraq has existed in near total anarchy, with tenuous control by local Kurdish bands with the tacit approval of the United States itself. Like other near-anarchies in Lebanon and the Sudan, this area was naturally exploited by terrorist and radical Islamic fundamentalist organizations. In particular, in December 2001,
Ansar al Islam, a group operating in Northern Iraq
outside of Hussein's control, began cozying up to al Qaeda members. Bad timing for you know who.
* In the confusing days of April, 2003, the Boston Globe reported that a crude chemical lab was found in the
Ansar-controlled town of Biyara. The story died, like all the other WMD chaff that hit the press and which was never officially verified. Again, it's important to remember that Biyara was
not controlled by Saddam Hussein. Why didn't we just knock over that section of Iraq with the help of local Kurdish militants, like we did with Afghanistan? If you checked the links above, you'll see that
we did! * Fortunately for those people in power here in America, something--rather, someone--else was in Biyara. When the Iranians mysteriously turned loose Abu Musab Zarqawi in 2002, guess where he showed up? That's right: northern Iraq, and some sources specifically tie him to Biyara (see links above).
* And also fortunately, that bad, bad man Zarqawi went straight after the Americans in the rest of Iraq as soon as they presented themselves as targets, as you all well know by now. But that's rather after the fact, isn't it? But what does the Administration care? We're stupid and they're incompetent.
*
Plan B is to announce the re-discovery of the chemical lab in Biyara, Iraq on Monday, June 26, 2004. Thay might even pop Zarqawi, too, if they get lucky, but he seems more valuable loose and scary to me.
* You also know the disinformation two step: Zarqawi! Iraq! Zarqawi! Chemicals! Zarqawi! Al Qaeda! Zarqawi! Orange Alert just before the elections! Oh, yeah, and it's Clinton's fault, too. Why, it all fits together so nicely into that Plan B. Reveal the existence of the "Iraqi" chemical lab. Tie it straight to Zarqawi. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, and presto! Found the WMDs. Found the al-Qaeda-Iraq link. The neocons were right all the time and don't we liberals, liberals, liberals look like assholes now.
* The conservative press is
already priming the public for this, not that Fox, Rush, and Bill ever stopped. And they'll scream "I told you so" at the top of their lungs.
But remember, those people in Washington are incompetent, and they think we're stupid. Here's a couple of questions to ask our Freeper friends when they start throwing their own feces from their cages:
*** So why did we have to overthrow Saddam Hussein to wipe out a fundamentalist organization which opposed Hussein? Why overthrow Hussein to destroy an organization which was (possibly) trying to create chemical weapons in an area outside of his control when that area could have been and was overthrown just as the Taliban was in Afghanistan? And most importantly, why are we learning this now?
In other words, it's still the same questions, just different, spectacular, uplifting, distracting non-answers. Again, the story as presented will be structured to mislead the American people. And hopefully, this time the American people are wise enough not to buy that snake oil again. But some days I think I should have invested in a snake farm.
There. That's my paranoid conspiracy rant. It has a two-week shelf life and you can laugh at me then if it doesn't pan out (although I'll point out that if Osama ain't to be had next week, the Zarqawi story can wait until October, the better to prevent reasoned scrutiny from percolating into the public conscience before the election). I'll be wrong in particulars no doubt, but I honestly believe I now see enough of it to correctly guess that this is the gist what those people are up to.
Thank you for your patience.
Sofa King
Sunday, June 11, 7:25pm EST.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
