Here we go... "THEY ARE HERE". Prepare for US elections suspension

[republicansarewhores]

The tone of this article is interesting, especially in citing how al Qaeda was especially pleased at how the attacks in Spain effected the electoral process there. I have no doubt that the facts in this article are probably true given BushCo's fueling of Islamic Fundamentalist rage against the US thorugh our war in Iraq. I've heard for every $1 dollar spent on Homeland Security, $3 dollars is being spent on the war in Iraq. Too bad we've been spending 3 times the amount waging war there instead of securing the nation's security to have prevented these al Qaeda cockroaches any chance of getting in here, isn't it?

P.S. Did anyone see the CBS News story tonight about multi-billion dollar corporations getting more money to secure their facilities than most public transportation agencies and cities do? Who says this isn't a CEO presidency?

RAW


U.S. Warns of Al Qaeda Threat
Operatives in Country Said to Be Planning Summer Attack

By Susan Schmidt and Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, May 26, 2004; Page A02


Federal officials have information suggesting that al Qaeda has people in the United States preparing to mount a large-scale terrorist attack this summer, sources familiar with the information said yesterday.

Attorney General John D. Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III intend to hold a joint news conference this afternoon to discuss the threat and to ask Americans to watch for several suspected al Qaeda operatives who may be in the country, officials said.

The concerns are driven by intelligence deemed credible that was obtained about a month ago indicating an attack may be planned between now and Labor Day.

That information dovetails with other intelligence "chatter" suggesting that al Qaeda operatives are pleased with the change in government resulting from the March 11 terrorist bombings in Spain and may want to affect elections in the United States and other countries.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55705-2004May25.html

[malatesta1137]

1. al-Qaida has ALREADY announced

they will NOT attack the US before November. This is all bullshit, Repukes are trying to win 2004 the same way the did in 2002, with FEAR. Scums of the Earth.

[Pobeka]

4. What's your source for that announcement?

Do you have a link?

[SnohoDem]

5. Do you have a cite for that?

Not arguing - I would love to have a web site to refer to.

[malatesta1137]

12. it was at the time of the Madrid bombings:

I had read that al-Qaida had announced by e-mail that they would not attack the US before the elections, because they knew it would have the reverse effect here. They seem to know more about us than we do. I can't provide a link but didn't dream it up.

Some stories pop up on-line and then vanish.

Another story that intrigued me was al-Qaida supporting Bush for reelection, which would contradict the one above.

[Kiliki]

13. The AL Qaeda supporting Bush "article" I read...

last month was pure satire. I wonder if some people didn't recognize that and believed it to be a real story and thats where the Al Qaeda/Bush myth grew from.

[malatesta1137]

29. Wrong

You are confusing comedy with news, even though some might think it's the same.

"In a statement released by the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades, which claimed responsibility for the Madrid bombings and claims to be the European military wing of al-Qaeda, the group's leader supported George Bush for president. The suprise announcement came coupled with an order by the group's leader for all al-Qaeda operatives in Europe to pause all terrorist operations. The reason for the ceasing of terrorist operations in Europe, according to the group, was to give Spain time to withdraw their troops from Iraq as Spain's newly elected socialist Prime Minister has promised to do. The terrorist group stated that it wished Bush to win because it was not possible to find a leader, "more foolish than you, who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom."

BUT:

If you click on the Reuters link in this post, the story is not there anymore:

http://www.seriouslythough.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=930

The same thing if you click on the Yahoo link in this post, the story is GONE!!

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=79609

I don't think it's because thee story is not credible, I think it's because it hurts Bush.

[Kiliki]

40. Um no, not wrong...

I read an actual satire on this about a month ago.

Perhaps you read a real article that's been removed, thats certainly possible. Shrug. But I also know what I read.

[radwriter0555]

34. al queda had nothing to do with the madrid bombings.

sorry.

[Beam Me Up]

8. But "al-Qaida" never attacked us in the FIRST place, don't you know?

So, even if you have a link to such an announcement, it is IRRELEVANT.

[radwriter0555]

36. No, they didn't, even the FBI corroborates that position. Al queda had

no role in the WTC attack... nor did they ever take credit for it.

[billyskank]

42. Wow - that's news to me.

So who do we think did do it? Have we any idea? (I don't think it was Saddam either :))

[fujiyama]

16. That seems like nonsense

I wouldn't really believe anything Al Qaeda says. It's not like they have actual goals to realize -- they are hellbent on destruction. Al Qaeda WANTS Bush reelected. For God's sake, Al Qaeda's thinking is very similar to the psychotic fanatical, religious mindset as the administration.

The Bush administration has been a boon to Al Qaeda. They have been able to recruit at a terrific rate, especially with the war in Iraq.

[radwriter0555]

33. oh hey, where IS that pesky press release???

LOL!

[Dogmudgeon]

2. Good article!

Good article, republicansarewhores.

I have only one little suggestion. At DU, we have decided to limit all use of copyrighted works to four paragraphs. It keeps us free from copyright hassles.

So, please, cut the article down to a spare four paragraphs, and please include a link back to the original article.

Thanks! And welcome to Democratic Underground!

--bkl
DU Moderator

[TrogL]

3. The attacks in Spain did nothing to the election

The Spanish electorate was furious that their existing Conservative government took them into Iraq. The government would have fallen, attacks or no attacks.

This is a Freeper myth.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. But a freeper myth they will keep ongoing

it is like that Lib'ral Media Myth, it WORKS... and they know it

[CJCRANE]

35. True but there's more...

the Spanish were against going into Iraq but the main reason the electorate turned against the incumbents was because they lied about who was behind the Madrid bombings. The incumbents blamed it on ETA before they even knew who did it, even though it was obvious that it was (and turned out to be) an Al-Qaeda type organisation.

It was the LYING that turned more of the electorate against the Conservatives, not the war or the bombings.

[LynzM]

37. Exactly.

I've been debunking that for people since it happened. makes me crazy.

[greatauntoftriplets]

45. True.

My boss was in Madrid visiting her uncle when the bombings happened. Just this morning, she told me (again) that Aznar's party had lost the election BEFORE the attacks. She is Chilean, Spanish is her first language and she has many friends in Spain with whom she was speaking before and after the attacks.

[July]

48. That's close to what I heard from Spanish friends.

It was never a foregone conclusion that Aznar's party would win. The last poll had them pretty close, and that was a week before the election. No polling is allowed in the final week. Aznar's manipulation of information about the attacks turned people further against Aznar's party, and more people went out to vote, as well. The truth about the attacks, and the fact that Aznar had been hiding the truth, which had been known for a few days, came out the night before the election, and that manipulation for political gain (Aznar had been hard on ETA, so blaming ETA would help him) -- not the terrorism itself -- affected the election.

[greatauntoftriplets]

49. Exactly.

The boss also said that people were unhappy with the blame falling on ETA, that the attacks did not bear ETA's MO.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Yep I saw that CBS Story

I suspsect we are seeing a media revolt.

[OneBlueSky]

9. what we have here is a setup . . .

when you put the alert level at orange until after the inauguration, anything that happens between now and then that might warrant increased vigilance leaves the threat level only one place to go: RED . . . and once it hits red (which it undoubtedly will before the election), all your rights are suspended and they can do anything they damn well please . . . including cancelling the election . . .

as I've said many, many times, BushCo has no intention of allowing Kerry to remove them from office . . . whatever must be done will be done to that end . . . be prepared for anything between now and November . . . and whatever that anything is won't be pleasant . . .

[Karenina]

17. as I've said many, many times,

"BushCo has no intention of allowing Kerry to remove them from office . . . whatever must be done will be done to that end . . . be prepared for anything between now and November . . . and whatever that anything is won't be pleasant . . ."

Let's see.. their *dauphin frontman fly-boy is tanking, right, left and center exposing their *slime. I KNOW! "5 AL-KIDDYA TURRISTS RUNNING WILD IN THE STREETS OF 'MURRIKA!" :eyes:

It is folly to think that *corp would hesitate for a nanosecond to create conditions for a massive die-off of the human population. It's an unpleasant reality to accept, but true. Don't take my word for it, go read PNAC for yourself- es steht da, schwartz auf weiss. :shrug:

Who was it testing nukes in Nevada the other day? :shrug:

I swear, this is the WORST. SCRIPT. EVER. :puke: :puke: :puke:

[Greenbeard]

30. time to rewrite the script

Good thing that we are all actors in this grand play even if we don't currently have the leading roles. As for a suspension of elections. I hope it does not come to that because it CAN NOT be allowed to happen. They would be unwise to underestimate the power of the people.

But who needs to suspend elections. Just take a look at the new voter laws being set up in Florida and probably elsewhere across the nation.

[Timefortruth]

46. Welcome to DU!

There would be a need to suspend elections if the outcome would be a Kerry landslide. No electoral calculation should consider that Kerry will win Florida, that is an impossibility. But there are states that Kerry will win that haven't been fixed well enough yet, if a Kerry win by a wide margin in those states seems probable then look for suspended elections.

[LynzM]

38. Stimmt.

"es steht da, schwartz auf weiss"

PNAC is freakin' scary. I mean, to blatantly put that kind of information, and sign your name to it, in a public place.

[VolcanoJen]

10. Terror terror fear terror war freedom war terror terror fear terror war.

It's their battlecry, their mantra.

I refuse to buy into their Factory of Fear. I'm finished with the lack of leadership. Come November, it's time to fire them all our damned selves.

By the way, did the White House not get the memo concerning erosion of American confidence in our intelligence systems?

[grasswire]

11. SUSAN SCHMIDT??

SUSAN SCHMIDT??

SUSAN SCHMIDT??

And we should believe this.....why??

[Kiliki]

14. This is such an obvious ploy...

the timing is just so OBVIOUS. Who do they think they're selling this to??

[jeff30997]

15. "BushCo has no intention of allowing Kerry to remove them from office"

Yes,i agree with OneBlueSky.Something big will happen before november and it will be ugly.

[Sensei_Rebel]

39. would you guys stop whining...

... and start spreading the draft dirt on Bush already.

[OKNancy]

18. There will be elections

First, a terrorist attack would be the worst possible thing for Bush. He has built his whole campaign on his strength to protect "us" from terrorists. So, MIHOP conspiracies are counter-intuitive.

Second, even if there is one, we will hold elections. There have been worse times, like the Civil War, and elections have never been canceled. Doom and gloom about al-queda is over-blown. They aren't near as strong and organized as the bushies would lead us to believe.
If they do manage to pull off some sort of attack, it will be a dud..IMO.

Third, talk like this suppresses turnout.
- Why vote and work for a candidate when they are going to cancel elections?
- Why vote, they are going to steal it anyway?
- Why vote, they are all the same?

[mopaul]

19. all logical conclusions

the fear talk is designed to do exactly what you suggest.
we are in new territory. or should i say terrortory.

[OKNancy]

21. Right

I think the fear talk is designed to do that....the problem is, it is the left that is falling for the fear-talk.
We should play up the differences. Look at Kerry. He's calm, thoughtful and positive as opposed to Bush, who is fearful, nervous, and negative.

[mopaul]

22. how is the left falling for it? i'm not.

i can see through the fog enough to know a bunch of phony balonie.

but you're right, most don't see nuance. the fear talk is mind control psy-ops manipulation stuff, it works great on most folks.

kerry is getting my vote. but i do feel fear, and will continue to do so until these nazis are gone. no one wants to die in a terror attack, or in a car crash.

short story: when i was a kid i developed nuclear bomb fear. had nightmares, bay of pigs, kruschef, castro, and i had the bomb fear for a decade. then it hit me one day, a bomb would be a quick way to go, something's gonna kill ya, stop worrying.

i'm crazy though. i believe bushco did 9-11, and it was so effective, they are planning the sequel to out do the original.
but i'm not buying into it, i'm just facing it.

[Eurobabe]

24. this should be used against *them,* where the hell

is Osama?? Why did they divert resources for the Iraq quagmire? Why hasn't America been made safer - to allow something like whatever is going to happen take place? Bu$hCo ensured a major recruitment uptick for terrorism with his phony war.

This is such f'ing bullsh*t.

[Q]

20. Aren't THEY being paid to 'watch' for terrorists?

- They're asking Americans to spy on their neighbors and be suspicious of everyone and every thing. So why then are we paying billions of dollars a year for 'security' and 'intelligence'?

- We're being SET UP.

- They're pounding this 'terrorists' want to influence the election bullshit into our heads so the Bushies can challenge any CLOSE RESULTS and blame it on...you guessed it...the terrorists.

[mopaul]

23. you guessed it

military evangelism takes many strange twists and turns.

[dusty64]

25. They've already stated

they will suspend elections if a "terra" attack happens and sadly I'm beginning to think they will get away with it.

[thecrow]

27. Link, please? n/t

[Oilwellian]

28. Here's a start

On Dec. 31, 2003, New York Times columnist and former Nixon speech writer William Safire offered his standard New Year’s predictions. This time, however, one item stood out. In addition to speculating on everything from which country would next "feel the force of U.S. liberation" to who would win the best picture Oscar, Safire predicted that "the 'October surprise' affecting the U.S. election" would be "a major terror attack in the United States."

While such speculation is hardly worth a trip to the duct tape store, when combined with repeated assaults to our democratic process and troublesome assertions from noteworthy sources, it warrants further investigation.

In Nov. 2003, you might recall, Gen. Tommy Franks told Cigar Aficionado magazine that a major terrorist attack (even one that occurred elsewhere in the Western world), would likely result in a suspension of the U.S. Constitution and the installation of a military form of government. " terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world -- it may be in the United States of America -- our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event," he said.

Right around the same time, former Clinton administration official David Rothkopf made similarly distressing observations. In a Washington Post op-ed entitled, "Terrorist Logic: Disrupt the 2004 Election," he described a meeting in which nearly 75 percent of the professional participants (characterized as "serious people, not prone to hysteria or panic") also foresaw another terrorist attack occurring on American soil before the next election. "Recently, I co-chaired a meeting hosted by CNBC of more than 200 senior business and government executives, many of whom are specialists in security and terrorism related issues," he wrote. "Almost three-quarters of them said it was likely the United States would see a major terrorist strike before the end of 2004."

<more>
http://www.buzzflash.com/farrell/04/04/far04011.html

[Malva Zebrina]

41. no doubt, in the Bush tradition, they are working up to this

it is probably obvious to them now, that they will not sweep the country in the next election.

No doubt in my mind they will cause something horrific to happen, and that in turn will cause them to declare Martial Law.

How that will go over is still not certain.

I think most Americans will willingly submit out of fear.

I think there may be a few scattered protests, but that our congress will also rubber stamp Bush's declaration of Martial Law.

There is no doubt in my mind that he will do so on the slightest bit of fear news he can muster. He stole the presidency once--there is nothing he will not do to coup us again.

I hope these musings do not come true.

[robertpaulsen]

44. Great link. Sad to say, it seems like a no-win situation.

I use the phrase no-win situation because Bush will be in power for at least another seven months. Seven months of more fuck-ups in Iraq, more restrictions on civil liberties, destruction of the environment etc. ad nauseum. Bush's numbers will continue to go down through the summer as gas prices go through the roof while troops continue to die for Halliburton. The Democratic Convention should give Kerry a commanding lead, then the Republican Convention will narrow the gap. Nothing unusual so far.

But October will be no Surprise for anyone paying attention. The whole month should be one big Orange Alert, occasionally slipping into Red when Bush feels public support waning. Rove will have his eyes and ears all over the polls. If Bush gains a significant lead, then there will be no attack and Bush will be portrayed in the corporate media as having vanquished the threat. If the race is too close to call, they may order an attack to stop the election, or they may just let Diebold install the Thief. If, like Spain, the public reacts adversely and swings in a large majority over to Kerry, then there will be an attack to shut down the election and perpetuate martial law. Say all you want about both candidates being Skull and Bones, Kerry has no ties to the PNAC and THEY cannot allow Kerry to take their base of power away.

When I try to imagine the miracle, that somehow Kerry can overcome the Diebold/BFEE conspiracy and take the election, the only reason I could see that happening is if Bush fucks things up so bad in the Middle East that they want the situation given to Kerry so that his hands are tied. If Iraq is so chaotic that, despite Kerry's begging, the U.N. refuses to send troops, Kerry may end up playing Nixon to Bush's LBJ, using the Vietnam analogy. Perhaps the BFEE is hoping that Kerry will not create his 10 million jobs and that they can paint his foreign policy as ineffectual, like Carter, and put Jeb Bush in position to take back the White House in 2008. I like to hope that a Kerry Administration would be like Clinton's Administration and create hope and prosperity for America.

But maybe that's just wishful thinking.

[oasis]

26. We were told Iraq became the "roach motel" for terrorists and we'd

be safe now because we're fighting them "over there".:shrug:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

31. This IS a CEO presidency

Read Nicholas von Hoffman's article about the privatization of war in the current issue of Harper's. It's worse than you imagine.

[republicansareevil]

32. Hey, great screen name!

Great minds, etc.... ;)

[tom_paine]

43. The fact that Steno Sue is writing this is suspicious

She has often been singled out by the Imperials for her willingness to launder lies for them.

I don't trust her or anything that Imperial Bootlicker writes.

This comes straight from Uncle Karl.

[rucky]

47. It's Gonna Be a Hellova Summer

hold onto your hats.