Book alleges Al Qaeda will attack US to ensure Bush win

[NNN0LHI]

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

New books also highlight intelligence, administration failures in war on terror.

by Tom Regan | csmonitor.com


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."

more

[D-Notice]

1. Ha!

Nice to see they're getting the blame in 1st! :D

Hard to see why "Al-Qaeda" would attack the US, unless someone else wants Bush to win "again"...

All it'd do is empower the neocons... Possible suspects?

[newyawker99]

16. Hi english guy!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[dusty64]

2. I don't doubt it and all

that proves is that they are working hand in hand with our regime, which I have suspected all along.

[NNN0LHI]

3. Put two and two together

The Saudis finance "Al-Qaeda". Bush and his family are thicker than thieves with the House Of Saud. Lets see now...

Don

[Jmeyers130]

4. Though...

what would another attack on American soil say about his "great" national security record...

i still don't get how americans see that as a strong point after 9/11...he was obviously weak against security there...

bunch of ignorant people...

[jmowreader]

5. If it happens, Bush is toast

Let's assume the Bush boy MIHOPs him up a terra attack in the middle of October, which is about the latest he could get away with it. The next thing that happens is all of his little Repug contemporaries stand up and say "we need George W. Bush to protect us from terrorism. Vote to reelect George W. Bush."

The heaviest Democrats in the country, led by John Kerry and the Big Dog, must immediately stand up and say "George Bush spent x billion dollars and eliminated many of your most precious liberties to fight terrorism, and this happened? How could it have happened, Mr. Bush? Considering that the country was on an enhanced alert footing since 9/11, you should have been on watch against terrorism. How did you let this happen?"

If we don't "rally behind the president," but rather ask him the most basic question--why did this happen?--Bush is toast.

[BiggJawn]

8. Your average Sheeple won't ask the "most basic question"....

They'll just go to Wally-World and buy more magical 9-11 teddy bears and hug them close while they let the nice, reasonable-sounding people on that "fair and balanced" FoxNews tell them that they need to get behind the Shrub.

Then, Like Tommy "Country Club" Franks told us in his interview with Stogie Sucker Monthly, they'll start screaming their heads off for Martial Law to "protect" them.

[SheilaT]

10. A very large number of Americans

are inclined to rally behind the President in time of crisis, no matter who the President is. Think back to the huge approval ratings Bush was getting in the immediate aftermath of Sept 11. And then go to some newspaper archives and look at what was going on in the days and weeks leading up to that event. Bush was performing poorly in office, taking vacations twice a month, and was in fact behaving like the spoiled brat who ruins a pick-up baseball game by taking his bat and going home. Remember the rumors that he might resign? Or the rumors that Cheney might do so because of poor health?

And then Sept 11 happened, and for a long time all criticism of Our Miserable Failure was silenced. He was recast as the heroic leader of brave men. Of course, it took him the better part of a week to work up the courage to visit the site of the WTC (when Bill Clinton somehow made it all the way back from Australia and got there in about two days) but that visit was treated as if he were MacArthur returning to the Philippines.

Enough people scare too easily to think that another attack would underscore the weakness of this regime. No. It would be played up as why we must keep this brave man and his fearless band in power.

[Corgigal]

6. I know how this can be stopped

make book stores stop selling My Pet Goat. Don't what this Prez to be distracted again.

[bushisanidiot]

7. How the hell would it ensure AWOL's election?? It will only show he FAILED

once again to protect US citizens as he was sworn to do.

[BiggJawn]

9. You know that, and I know that.....

...But then how do you explain the fact that The People havent marched on DC with torches and pitchforks already?

The Sheeple will rally round the King out of fear, just like they have for millenia....

[NNN0LHI]

13. Yes. Fear can make people act irrationally

The Chimp had over a 90% approval rating after 9/11. I think another major attack would do the same thing again.

Don

[uptown ruler]

11. we shall see, shan't we...

Spreading The Word
The Irony Curtain Shop

[gasperc]

12. and God knows Bush is pushing every single one of their buttons

so that the terrorists do strike

sent troops into Falluja, in a heavy handed way

approved Iraqi flag with the same colors as Israels

prisoner torture

it goes on and on

[Moderator]

14. Duplicate

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=636491

[aden_nak]

15. Sad but true.

You know, I was about to point out that a terrorist attack in Spain COST the conservative, pro-war party the election instead of delivering it to them, and that the same thing might happen here if al Queda operatives attempt to swing the election for the Boy Who Would Be King with another attack of some kind. Then I remembered that, as a country, we have some of the jerkiest knees in the world.

What's sad is that if there is NO terrorist attack, it will be served up as proof that Bush's "War on Terror" is an outstanding success.

If there IS a terrorist attack, it will be served up as proof that Bush is a strong leader, and we need to stand behind him in this time of crisis.

Spin's a crazy thing, no?

[qb]

17. How do they know the intent of the Madrid bombing was to change

the administration? What about the Spanish government connections to the bombing? I'll be the "intention" was to keep the same government, but they fucked up.

[tom_paine]

18. Oh, I think that book won't mention the Bush* LIHOP role in LIHOP #2

I expect it will come exactly as Rayguns Conveniently Timed Death came (and I predicted correctly from 3 years ago the 3 months window of his death).

Perhaps a little early, but mostly right on time.

Aug.-Oct. is the time frame for LIHOP #2 (maybe July if the Bushes & al-Qaeda Business Partners decide to move early)

[Gators4Dean]

19. Silly

This is silly