 |
Decoding Scheuer’s Call for Osama to Kill More Americans
“War on Terror” advocates want civilians to die to justify “War on Terror”
James Corbett
The Corbett Report
Monday, July 6, 2009
CIA analyst Michael Scheuer’s recent call for bin Laden to kill more Americans would be shocking if we hadn’t already heard it dozens of times before from other “War on Terror” advocates. “It’s an absurd situation,” Scheuer told FOX News personality Glenn Beck on his program last week. “Only Osama can execute an attack that will force Americans to demand that their government protect them effectively, consistently, and with as much violence as necessary.”
The comments have provoked much shock and outrage among pundits and websites like Jon Stewart and NewsHounds who may have considered him to be on their side. After all, he seemed to be a vociferous and effective critic of the neocons, having authored books like Imperial Hubris and having supported Ron Paul during the 2008 Presidential debates by asserting that 9/11 was merely blowback for American interventionism in the Middle East. With his latest comments, Scheuer is now relegated to the ignoble company of neocon shills like Stu Bykofsky of the Philadelphia Inquirer, who dreamed of another terrorist attack back in 2007 to rally people around the flag (and, presumably, George W. Bush) once again; Donald Rumsfeld, who complained in 2006 that the Bush regime was a victim of its own success in the “War on Terror” and that another terrorist attack was needed to remind people that the war was still necessary; and indeed the entire neocon establishment, who in their 2000 white paper Rebuilding America’s Defenses called for “a catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor” to mobilize the public to get behind their goal of projecting American military influence around the globe for another century. Despite his surprisingly unhelpful attempt to clarify his remarks, Scheuer is now—like all of those who have said that terrorism is needed to bring about political support for their idea—a terrorist himself by very definition.
The “War on Terror”
What seems paradoxical at surface level—that Scheuer is essentially joining the neocons he once opposed in wishing for another terrorist attack—is in fact perfectly understandable at a deeper level of analysis. Scheuer, like the neocons, shares an underlying belief in the “War on Terror” itself: the idea that the U.S. is facing a dramatic and existential threat from radical Muslim terrorists. They may differ in their belief about the motivating causes of this war or the best way to fight it, but that the U.S. itself is at war cannot be questioned. Thus, both Scheuer and the neocons face a shared concern: growing public skepticism taht a “War on Terror” is really taking place, or is necessary.
 |
Indeed, since the “catalyzing event” of the “War on Terror” on 9/11/2001, Americans have been subjected to a never-ending series of vague, unsubstantiated threats from unnamed sources; a parade of losers, ex-cons, drug addicts and mentally challenged individuals who couldn’t organize a party on a Saturday night let alone a massive terrorist attack, who are inevitably spurred on, organized and funded by the FBI but who are supposedly serious threats to army bases and government buildings; the assertion that there is a new cadre of white Al-Qaeda ready to take up the jihad and strike at the ‘Homeland’; that right-wingers, gun owners and war vets (or is that left-wingers, peace activists and war moms?) are their willing accomplices, as are people who cite the consitution, vote for third parties or even sweat too much; and now not only does the Patriot Act make every misdemeanour an act of terrorism, the Department of Defense is now openly classifying all political protest as acts of terrorism. Is it any wonder that the electorate’s trust in the government has reached an all-time nadir and that the overwhelming majority of Americans think they are being lied to about 9/11 itself?
And so men like Scheuer find a common enemy with the neocons: those who understand that there are radical Muslims who are willing to fight and die for their cause, but don’t believe they would be able to carry off an attack even approaching the scale of 9/11 without the active support of state actors and intelligence agencies. Of course, nothing can convince someone that there is an imminent terrorist threat like a terrorist attack, so those who are convinced of the necessity of the “War of Terror” end up hoping for terrorists to strike down some of their fellow countrymen so they can get back to fighting over how best to wage the war.
Worryingly, it is a remarkably small leap from the conviction that a new terrorist attack would be helpful to the decision to provocateur or stage just such an attack. While it remains doubtful that Mr. Scheuer would ever entertain such thoughts, the same cannot be said of some of his less scrupulous compatriots. Even Zbigniew Brzezinski warned the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2007 that a terrorist attack was likely to be staged in order to provide the Bush Administration with a pretext for attacking Iran. Nor is this concern over false-flag terrorism merely hypothetical. It is already official government policy.
In 2002, Rumsfeld oversaw the creation of a new strike force in the “War on Terror” called P2OG. Short for Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group, it was a body bringing together CIA and Pentagon teams to combine military, technical and intelligence capabilities. The group’s responsibilities include “’stimulating reactions’ among terrorists and states possessing weapons of mass destruction—that is, for instance, prodding terrorist cells into action and exposing themselves to “quick-response” attacks by U.S. forces.”
In effect, Rumsfeld and the DoD decided that it was worth letting some civilians die in order to flush the terrorists out. The enormity of this revelation was not lost on Chris Floyd of Counterpunch: “Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, George W. Bush and the other members of the unelected regime in Washington plan to deliberately foment the murder of innocent people—your family, your friends, your lovers, you—in order to further their geopolitical ambitions.”
Again, it is important to note that the idea of provoking terrorists into acting or allowing innocent civililans to die so the “War on Terror” can forge ahead is not speculation or fantasy. It is an official government strategy. And it was implemented in Iraq.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
U.S. and British Staging Terror in Iraq
During the Troubles in Northern Ireland, the British Army set up an intelligence unit with the throwaway name Force Research Unit (FRU) to implant moles into every level of the IRA. Kevin Fulton was one of those operatives in FRU, providing inside intel on IRA operations to his handlers; intel, he was assured, that reached all the way to the Prime Minister’s office. He caught wind of the 1998 Omagh Bombing in advance and warned his handlers 48 hours ahead of time that an attack was about to take place. The decision was made not to stop the attack because to do so would have meant blowing the cover of one of their high-ranking IRA moles. Consequently, nothing was done and the bombing went ahead, claiming the lives of 29 civilians and injuring over 300. In the wake of the attack, the disgraced FRU became known as the Joint Support Group (JSG) and was redeployed to Afghanistan and Iraq to transplant their ‘anti-terror’ techniques to the streets of Baghdad and Basra. (See this article for the FRU/JSG story)
 |
|
| In 2005, these SAS officers were in a shootout with Iraqi police and broken out of jail by British tanks. |
In 2005, British SAS officers dressed up as Arabs got into a shootout with Iraqi police. They were subdued, and their booby-trapped car, laden with ammunition, was seized. Rather than explain what the SAS officers may have been attempting to do, the British sent in six tanks to free the two prisoners from an Iraqi jail. (See the full story here).
In 2006, the dome of the Al-Askariya Mosque, one of the most important Shia Mosques in the world, was ripped apart by a bomb. The Sunnis had nothing to gain by staging this attack and inflaming the Shi’ite community in Iraq, but an increase in sectarian violence is the expected result. At the time, 27 year CIA veteran Ray McGovern said he believed western intelligence may have been behind the bombing. When the Mosque was bombed again the following year the Iraqis outright accused the U.S. ofs having done it in order to promote sectarian strife and keep the region Balkanized.
Just this year, intelligence analyst and investigative journalist Wayne Madsen revealed that American intelligence has been sending Afghan mercenaries into Iraq in order to kill and terrorize the local civilians and even American military.
Such stories, of course, are completely counter-intuitive, even nonsensical, to the average mind. When the P2OG game plan of provoking terror in order to fight the terrorists is revealed, however, it makes sense. This is the warped logic of one who succumbs to the idea that terror attacks are necessary to help protect us from terror.
The False-Flag Mentality
To say that there is no difference between musing about an attack to imagine its possible “beneficial” consequences and actually making that attack happen would be wrong. But to say that such a leap is unfathomable or without precedent would be equally erroneous.
With P2OG in our own time and Operation Northwoods half a century ago, the American military has shown that it is willing and able to commit acts of terrorism in order to “win” a greater war. It would be a disservice to our country if we were not to question our leaders when they come up with plans of such unspeakable moral bankruptcy, and it is equally necessary to rebuke those who start down this path of reasoning by declaring the necessity or helpfulness of a terrorist attack. Once one has made that decision to welcome terrorism for its transformative political power, one has opened the doorway to false-flag terrorism and the sacrifice of innocent civilians.
Perhaps it is no surprise that Glenn Beck seemed to hardly even blink as Scheuer made his outrageous comments. Beck himself seems to share in this false-flag mentality whereby the trauma of a major terror attack is actually something to rejoice in (cf. his entire “9/12 Project” premise). It can only be hoped that when and if a commentator is to make such thoughtless and potentially terroristic comments as those made by Scheuer (and Bykofsky and Rumsfeld) the interviewer will have the wherewithal to call them on it.
Related works from The Corbett Report:
Problem Reaction Solution (podcast episode)
A bioterror false flag (podcast episode)
Leo Strauss, the ‘Noble’ lie and 9/11 (article)
Prison
Planet.tv Members Can Watch
Fall Of The Republic
Right Now Online -
Don't Miss Out! Get
Your Subscription Today!
CANCER CONSPIRACY? Are
"they" suppressing the cure? Will YOU
be the next victim? Learn
the Secret Truth! - READ FULL STORY
-
- Social bookmarks
- Email this article
-
- Print this page
30 Responses to “Decoding Scheuer’s Call for Osama to Kill More Americans”
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |||||||
| By N2H | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
July 6th, 2009 at 7:19 am
We as a country are broke. We cannot continue our military presence around the world, in its current form, as our country deteriorates from within. The idea that we are a force of good in the world has long since faded.
July 6th, 2009 at 7:34 am
the terrorist are in the whitehouse.
July 6th, 2009 at 7:46 am
Michael Scheuer-Former head of the CIA’s Bin LAden Unit. Has been seen ALL OVER the MSM since 9/11 playing up how scary and capable and alive Osama is. All while the MSM ignores his failure to capture Osama Bin Goldstein in the run up to 9/11. If you cant see through this professional liars bullshit then I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn. 50 bucks. I dont care how right he is abouot some issues and his willingness to criticize Israel, he is pure disnfo and makes a point to sprinkle in some sugar with his poison. Do not trust him.
Dave Reply:
July 7th, 2009 at 5:40 am
You notice how his eyes are always bugged out and he looks really weird constantly? How could anyone believe someone that looks like him. Even Bill Maher didn’t believe seem to believe him when he tried to say that the most recent Bin Laden video where he has jet black hair is real on his show.
Zakheim=guilty Reply:
July 7th, 2009 at 7:01 am
Maher doesnt exactly have the best track record himself when it comes to the “‘war on terror”, but you’re right, seeing Scheuer pop his head out when “Osama” puts out tapes(all audio now of course.) is a sure bet(the MSM loves him)and he sounds pathetic every time.
July 6th, 2009 at 7:56 am
Corbett totally missed the context of Scheuer. He basically said that politicians wont get serious about protecting the border. Then he used a huge scenario that would seem to be the only way to get the politicians to get to action. Sure he could have been a little more tactful in his example but the point was to make it big. The problem isn’t that he said this it is that so many people that hear it are to ignorant to understand the subtleties and context.
Zakheim=guilty Reply:
July 6th, 2009 at 8:03 am
My point stands about him though. Just because hes a rightwinger on immigration(if he was serious about immigration he would attack the companies that hire illegals instead of blaming the mexicans-notice how those loudest about illegal immigration pretty much fail to do this. hmmmmm.) and you agree with him on that doesnt make him some kind of honest guy. Hes not to be trusted.
Bastet77 Reply:
July 6th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Zalkheim
People do blame employers of course, but these illegals are not blameless. They broke the law sneaking into this country illegally. THIS IS AGAINST THE LAW. What part of ILLEGAL do you not understand?
C Reply:
July 6th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
And what does bitching about them do but divert attention from the EMPLOYERS that make it possible! NOTHING. If the employers didnt employ them the illegals WOULD NOT COME HERE. Its fun to bash mexicans though right? Almost like blaming a victim. Fox News is proud. sigh.
Dave Reply:
July 7th, 2009 at 5:42 am
Oh whatever, those people are dirt poor. What makes you more valuable than them just cause you were born here? The Zionist Jews and the neocons are who should be deported.
Fair and Balanced Reply:
July 6th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Don’t waste your time, TOAD – people hear simply don’t want to hear it. They’re too busy wilfully misinterpreting Scheuer’s remarks. I know you’re right, you know you’re right, the man on the streets knows you’re right but what price truth when a hysterical response is so much more fun?
Bastet77 Reply:
July 6th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
fair and balanced
Your right on the mark. Hysteria is so much fun, they won’t listen.
C Reply:
July 6th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Both of you are useful idiots. follow Scheuer and his ilk off of a cliff.
July 6th, 2009 at 8:14 am
im buying a gun and a bow
July 6th, 2009 at 8:15 am
Scott Horton recently went face-to-face with him on this
http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/.....cheuer-10/
Dave Reply:
July 7th, 2009 at 5:43 am
Horton’s a shill too though, or at least an official story supporter.
July 6th, 2009 at 10:55 am
This guy is an operative just like Glenn Beck is. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was being paid to spread this dis-info just as Gen. Tommy Franks was paid $500,000 dollars to say “We need martial law” over and over again in the press.
He knows damn well that OSB is long dead and he is still perpetuating the myth of his ability to attack us on our own soil while also boistering the claim that OSB was behind 9/11.
Scum!!!
C Reply:
July 6th, 2009 at 11:05 am
DING DING DING DING DING! You WIN! Absolutely right.
July 6th, 2009 at 11:57 am
[...] post: Decoding Scheuer’s Call for Osama to Kill More Americans Related Reading: The Rise of the Ku Klux Klan: Right-Wing Movements and National Politics [...]
July 6th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Man, War on Terror?
That’s one generation late. Now it’s War on CO2, and YOU are a terrorist to the planet.
July 6th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
It almost seems that the name OSAMA has become a code word in Washington to signal the real terrorists that we need another 9/11 to divert the attention away from the real 9/11 fraud and the current events that are stealing our rights out from under the average Amerikan person.
Osama Bin Laden has been dead since December 17th 2001 so it is IMPOSSIBLE for him to still be employed by the CIA, but he still makes a good boogey man for real terrorists employed by the Government.
July 7th, 2009 at 12:31 am
He’s just saying that the new administration is letting down it’s guard and the Jihadist will strike again.
A bit too much DE-CODING!
Scheuer is opposed to all US committment to Israel! No NeoCon, he!
Dave Reply:
July 7th, 2009 at 5:44 am
I think that shit about not supporting Israel is just his way of gaining people’s trust. His main thing is promoting Bin Laden still being alive and a threat.
Zakheim=guilty Reply:
July 7th, 2009 at 7:04 am
Exactly. All good disinfo is mostly true, its not surprising that he gets the Israel issue mostly right or gets some other issues right. Some people just cant see this obvious fact. These are serious issues, of course there are disinfo pushers out there and Scheuer is one of them. And quite obvious based on his previous job. He has a PERSONAL STAKE in keeping the “war on terror” alive and the “Osama is still alive and a super-terrorist” myth strong.
July 7th, 2009 at 3:52 am
I see what appears to me to be quite a bunch of highly-trustworthy zionist pant-stains on the site here and they’re all practically in-unison in insisting that Scheuer is not trying to terrorize anyone and that he’s anti-zionist, and that they have the proof of the latter in his broadcasted-but-impotent words about that foreign political lost-cause that is the gaza strip.
I’m not impressed with the apparent left-right combination aimed at the public by these clowns, whatever politics they embrace. Scheuer’s supposedly-all-so-wise PNAC moments and his pant-stain-peanut-gallery apparently never mention the political gambits of false-flagging or false-opposition, nor do they say anything to suggest such gambits could be effective, while their mentions of neocons apparently never include any reference to their Straussian philosophy and how it apparently, by its conventional socio-holographic so-called wisdom, practically assumes and encourages such gambits.
Zakheim=guilty Reply:
July 7th, 2009 at 7:05 am
False opposition is exactly the way to put it. A sort of gov insider version of Chomsky.
pinchnroll Reply:
July 7th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Thanks for pointing out Strauss. Folks need to be aware of the origins of the neo-con party, which was begun at the University of Chicago, which was started by who…Rockefeller. Gotta point the fingers at the banking elite once again. Oh yeah, lets mention that when Standard Oil was broken up by the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, Rockefeller still had control of the majorities of ALL the companies born from the ashes. His “Phoenix” is stronger and larger now than ever, still controlled by his offspring all these years later…
I could use an asparin…these elitist fucktards realy give me a headache
July 7th, 2009 at 5:14 am
Milo Clark has some interesting observations about Straussians, wahabis and famous GOP actors. Surprised here that I’m the first on the page to bring up Strauss.
I won’t say these neocon losers aren’t heroes and economic genii, they did ramp up the conflict between oil consumers and producers by encouraging consumption, for instance, they claim to be for reducing abortions and seek support from anti-abortion/pro-adopt religious factions, all very pro-consumer. When they say we’re not militant enough globally, that we’re fat and too happy from all the consumerism recently, that we need to be roused from our self-absorbed stupors, they really know what they’re talking about, I suppose. Really, I think they’re jet-setting hi-fashion population-topiary geniuses. Feel like poodles yet?
July 7th, 2009 at 5:29 am
“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste”
…. by ever tainting it with accountability.
July 7th, 2009 at 8:51 am
The evil and deceit works on so many levels. When so called “political enemies” magically come together on the mythology of the war on terror, its primarily so a wider demographic is appealed to. ( ie: left and right wing ).