The National Security Archive has just released a Load of Files Electronic Briefing Book No. 253 Posted - August 20, 2008 under the title: 1998 Missile Strikes on Bin Laden May Have Backfired with a subtitle: Extensive 1999 Report on Al-Qaeda Threat Released by U.S. Dept of Energy,
Taliban Told U.S. They Wanted to Bomb Washington

With backlinks to the PDF's and more links in the sidebar on the left.

Now that John McCain has virtually cinched the GOP Presidential nomination, almost if it were on cue, the chief of the US Northern Command, Air Force General Gene Renuart has warned that "Al Qaeda terrorists may be plotting more urgently to attack the United States." The timing of the warning is perfect, allowing McCain to continue with his campaign of fear and harping on the danger of terrorism. If he doesn't have a viable plan to salvage the economy, secure the southern border, and a host of issues the GOP refuses to address, then only one path is left, and that's to use the tactics of fear and intimidation. The problem is, General Renuart's warning doesn't make sense once you add-up the facts and what we know of Al Qaeda:

Crossposted from Left Toon Lane, Bilerico Project & My Left Wing


click to enlarge

Do you believe in coincidences? Of course, they happen all the time, and with this government, coincidence and incompetence are the bread and butter of the Bush administration. When I quoted "Le Canard Enchaîné" which I found in The New York Sun that predicted an attack on Iran would occur on October the 15th, I was then unaware that NORTHCOM was Planning a 5 Day anti-terrorism exercise called Vigilant Shield 08. I noted that members from the site George W. Bush - Terrorist in the White House were following a link to my article on the subject, Attack On Iran Slated For October 15th, Prepare For Disaster. Being my usual curious self, I went to their site, and I found this link staring me in the face - and when I read it, a chill ran up my spine as I attempted to grasp the magnitude of the "coincidence.":

Americans have been driven by fear, lies, and the propaganda of the profoundly ruthless into a collective hysteria, a madness that has been exploited by its authors to manipulate us into a devastating and unjust war – and there’s another even bigger one coming up.  What is so amazing is that even the ‘leaders’ on our side of the aisle are acting as though it is all perfectly acceptable – entirely and indisputably sane.  They have bought into the patently false GWOT meme and are shamelessly chugging the Kool-Aid in public like a bunch of drunken power whores.

(Updated below)

Pakistan has often been praised by the Bush administration, among others, for its role in the Global War on Terror(TM). President Bush even once proclaimed a broad and lasting strategic partnership with Pakistan to this effect.

Despite evidence to the contrary.

The internet abounds with deconstructions of the case against Usama bin Laden for planning 9/11 and materially assisting the hijackers, and it isn't a hard case to deconstruct, because the so-called "evidence" against him consists of a sequence of simple-minded exercises in the art of foregone conclusions.

(Updated below)

A little more than two years ago, on July 22nd 2005, Jean Charles de Menezes - an electrician of Brazilian origin - was shot in the head (and eight times overall) at point blank by London police. You see - the day just before, on July 21st 2005, a terrorist London transit system bombing plot had been thwarted. It was quite a close call - consequently, fear, insecurity, paranoia and outright hysteria reigned supreme in the wake of this failed plot.

Thus Menezes was summarily shot at a London Underground train station, on July 22nd 2005, by hyper-vigilant and trigger-happy police officers who had been following him, because: A) his clothing and "behavior" were somehow deemed suspicious; B) he was mistaken to be of Middle Eastern origins; and therefore C) he was suspected to be a suicide bomber with an explosive belt around his waist.

Barack Obama has a plan.

If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will.

He is a manly man! But I'm having a horrible flashback!

During his recent televised speech about Iraq, the president hammered home the point once again that a loss in Iraq is a victory for Al Qaeda. Of that, no realist without a political agenda could argue. What he failed to mention with clarity, however, is that a loss in Iraq is also a victory for Iran — a clear victory at that, and one whose ramifications may extend far beyond those of a victorious Al Qaeda.

Yeah, yeah, I know -an alarmist title. Well....whatever. I was originally going to call the diary “Al Qaeda, nukes and Paksitan – how close to reality is it?” but decided not to. Consider that the subtitle.

But the situation which somehow seems to get ignored or dismissed by more people than I can believe is the fact that over the past few weeks we have found out the following:

The question of a definition of terrorism has haunted the debate among states for decades.

Here is a summed up definition of terrorism from a 2001 report of the U.S. State Department (the original report is no longer available online apparently, and thus I use this article as source instead): Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets (civilians and/or military personnel who are unarmed, or off duty at the time) by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience. Acts of terrorism are also considered as attacks on military installations or on armed military personnel when a state of military hostilities does not exist at the site, such as bombings against military bases.

However clear such a definition may appear to be, it nonetheless falls short when one considers insurgents against a regime or resistance fighters against occupiers. That is why the main difficulty in clearly defining terrorism lies with the unfortunately inconvenient - but nevertheless realistically valid - argument that one state's "terrorist" is often another state's "freedom fighter".

Reading the news today was like being slapped in the face with a dose of horror and dread – evenly mixed so they would deliver the greatest impact once they had been properly looked-over and digested – although once I had, the implications were so disgusting that I felt like puking it all back out – and then find a nice, dark place to sit and wonder why Congress is co cowardly, and why no on

It’s a well known children’s story, the shepherd boy, alone on the hill, wanting attention.  They gave him instructions on what to do if a wolf threatened the flock of sheep he was tending.  Call out they told him and they’ll come running.

Right from the very beginning we expected at the very least a total breakdown in Iraq as a result of Bush's attack and it is now openly being fueled by the Iraqi Government. Iraqi Al Qaeda has also come out and warned that if Iran continued killing Sunni's in Iraq that they would go to war with Iran.