Christmas in Yemen
We want you to learn something about the U.S. escalation of the war against al-qaeda in Yemen, but today we are going to present you with information in a strange way, by linking you to liberal reports. The Left’s reporting on the American Empire is often accurate, but it suffers from a pro-socialist bias. We’ll try to dig out the good information without supporting their implied conclusion, that socialism is superior to capitalism. Actually, the socialists and the multinational capitalists are cooperating at many levels to usher in the age of New World Order control. At the same time, journalism on the Right is biased in favor of the American empire and is supporting the U.S. military invasion strategy out of fear of al-qaeda terrorism. Conservative reporting is so naive that it is worthless.
The general conclusion of the Left’s reporting is that the Obama administration sponsored the underwear terrorist in Detroit so that it could have an excuse to escalate the war in Yemen in the name of a war against al-qaeda. Let’s examine their case.
Kurt Nimmo reports on the terror rhetoric used to justify escalation of the war against al-qaeda in Yemen. Webster Tarpley is claiming the U.S. “underwear bombing” was a false flag event designed to justify the U.S. escalation in Yemen. Several internet news outlets are picking up and running the Tarpley story.
“The new CIA-promoted entity synthetic entity is “Al Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula or AQAP, a gaggle of US patsies, dupes, and fanatics which is claiming credit for the Umar Farouk incident.”
“It should be obvious now that the Umar Farouk incident was a false flag event designed precisely to cobble together a pretext for an invasion of the “failed state” Yemen where al-Qaeda has magically and conveniently taken up residence.”
Quick summary of the Tarpley version of events at the SF Examiner.
The Telegraph reports that British intelligence warned the U.S. about the Detroit bomber a year ago. However, the White House rebuts the claim.
Tarpley on who should be fired.
Bill Van Auken presents the “conspiracy vs. negligence” case. The fact that Abdulmutallab’s father attempted to warn the CIA about his son’s al-qaeda connection does point the finger of accusation toward the CIA.
Patrick Martin argues for conspiracy vigorously. But we wonder, wouldn’t Obama have too much to lose to sponsor or allow a domestic terror event? Why would he put the whole national security bureaucracy in question simply to escalate a war he could escalate anyway?
Joe Quinn and the “mind-controlled patsy” argument. Digression: If you are unfamiliar with MK-Ultra mind control experiments, you need to get up to speed with the U.S. military’s ability to control minds, even to produce “super-soldiers” who can assassinate without knowing they have done so. Jesse Ventura interviewed a mind-controlled assassin for one of his Conspiracy Theory TV shows. You can start there.
Tom Burghardt and the “Obama did it to enrich the defense companies” argument. “Who would benefit” analysis is merely a starting point for investigation, not evidence of a conspiracy. Of course, it doesn’t help matters that Obama has appointed unqualified women to the leading positions overseeing national security, and some of these women have histories of working for and lobbying for companies that profit greatly from government contracts. Still, domestic terrorist events work to undermine confidence in these unqualified women. It isn’t really in their interest to allow a terrorist event as that would threaten their jobs.
Burghardt has ahold of this story and won’t let go. He draws the parallels between the 9/11 coverup and Obama’s “connect the dots” coverup. The December bombing attempt is being called “Obama’s 9/11.”
Finian Cunningham believes the CIA passed along the information on Abdulmutallab to Homeland Security, who allowed the bombing to serve as a justification for Obama’s invasion of Yemen. Our objection to this line of thinking: name the persons who allowed it.
The “CIA is broken” line. We don’t believe this line of investigation can bear any fruit unless an insider agent flips. The CIA is a black hole, information in, disinformation out.
How al-qaeda threats have been ginned up previously.
It appears these socialist investigators have now adopted the line that President Obama is a terrorist conspirator. But, in a further twist, Gordon Duff manages to pin the blame on Bush.
Obama’s 9/11 is a silly site that attempts to blame two released al-qaeda prisoners for masterminding the December bombing. Not likely. The “capitalist cabal” is real enough, but there is no evidence linking them with the attempted bombing.
Obama criticizes the CIA for “not connecting the dots.” But border security in Detroit was aware of Abdulmutallab’s potential terror threat.
Public discussion following the incident has forced the Obama administration on the defensive. Now the administration is moving toward nation of origin profiling, and this policy contradicts its previous soft position against profiling. The Left doesn’t want profiling because it slows the anti-white takeover and exposes their control over Moslem and other “minority” subversives.
The global socialists have disengaged from supporting Obama because he has escalated the wars in the Middle East. They view him as the reincarnation of Bush, the agent of Bush, or powerless to prevent Bush’s continuing influence. The domestic naive Left can’t imagine that Obama would be involved in a domestic terrorist event. They consider the Christmas bombing an unfortunate security lapse. The Right appears to be caught in a naive view of 9/11 and a naive view of Obama. The Right wants to focus on the domestic security system and prevent further breakdowns while supporting Obama every time he mentions al-qaeda.
Let’s move past the domestic opinion and refocus on understanding what is going on in Yemen.
21st Century British Nationalism writes about Europe’s response to the Afganistan escalation. Pipeline politics is at the heart of the agenda. At stake: Russian dominance over Europe’s energy supplies. Saudi Arabia may be tilting away from U.S. support toward China.
William Engdahl on the formation of al-qaeda in Yemen, oil politics, and Obama’s interpretation of U.S. interests. Engdahl highlights the tensions between the United States and Saudi Arabia and China and avoids falling into liberal logic:
“Given that significant flows of Saudi oil pass through Bab el-Mandab, a US military control there would serve to deter the Saudi Kingdom from becoming serious about transacting future oil sales with China or others no longer in dollars, as was recently reported by UK Independent journalist Robert Fisk.”
Al-qaeda in Yemen may be a CIA-sponsored rag-tag of less than 200 individuals, and ultimately insignificant within the larger context of struggles in Yemen, as the Left claims, or it may be the launching ground for further terrorist attacks, as the Right claims, but larger geostrategic concerns are at work here. The revelation of interest is wavering Saudi support for the United States as its defense department. Saudi Arabia’s new tilt toward China would have to concern any U.S. administration, especially one whose main energy policy involves supporting wind and solar energy. Obama has missed the opportunity to shift the United States away from energy dependence on foreign oil by sponsoring meaningless Green initiatives. These silly policies leave him anchored to Mideast oil interests. His gamble in Afghanistan (as front for his wider war) is that he can manipulate, dominate, and destabilize every nation from North Africa to the Russian border without bankrupting the United States.
Yemen is also a crucial link in oil exports from the Middle East in the event the Hormuz straits are blocked. Controlling Yemen’s oil export route may be a crucial piece of a “war against Iran” strategy.
Yemen as a crucial link in the U.S. military base chain “from Northern Africa to the Chinese border.”
“The American component of the Greater Afghan War is Operation Enduring Freedom, which takes in Afghanistan, Cuba (Guantanamo Bay Naval Base), Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, the Philippines, Seychelles, Sudan, Tajikistan, Turkey, Uzbekistan and Yemen.”
U.S. Africom initiatives.
The Obama administration says it will not release any more terrorists into Yemen. Another embarrassment for Obama. But all those voices on the Right criticizing the Soft Obama and calling for a Hard Obama are simply reinforcing Obama’s wider war effort. The paradox of the Right’s fear of terrorism is, they are tying themselves to a deceiver and liar, a weak player on the world stage, a hard left radical, and a policy of bleeding America into financial collapse.
Agents, double agents, India, Pakistan, Mossad, and U.S. intelligence.
Joel Skousen reports on Dutch intelligence cover-ups on the security issue.
Victor Thorn digs deeper. The underwear bomber didn’t have the ability to blow up the plane. Mossad controls the airport security, and Abdulmutallab’s father has connections with Mossad. An Indian man was also arrested on the flight. The bombing attempt was filmed on board. The two al-qaeda released from Guantanimo to Yemen were U.S. assets. If these details are essentially correct, all other reporting appears speculative and biased and should be regarded as disinformation. We can’t find anything to question in Skousen and Thorn’s reporting. We believe this is the essential nugget.
It appears Mossad did Obama a Christmas favor by sponsoring a relatively harmless terror event to justify his escalation in Yemen. We don’t have any insider information, we are simply reading carefully without the blinders and prejudices of the Left or Right worldviews and with our superior understanding of history as background. We could be proven wrong in this particular case. We recognize that disinformation agents are hard at work in all such incidents, and it is very difficult to separate out the lies.
Why no reporting on ICTS in the U.S. media when the rest of the world is running the story?
Of minor interest:
Yemen launches counterterrorism attack.
Sunni clerics warn of anti-U.S. jihad.
Gordon Brown caught in lie over support for Yemen.
Chertoff’s conflict of interest on body scanner technology. Britain is moving ahead with body scanners.
UN reports on forced migrations in Yemen.
Rami Khouri on why the U.S. media consistently miss the big picture on terrorism.
U.S. media commentary seems uniformly simple-minded.
Ron Paul speculates about the connection between escalation of the U.S. war in Yemen and the domestic “bombing” incident. But Ron Paul falls far short of providing any evidence that the Flight 253 bomber was a U.S.-controlled stooge. Ron Paul doesn’t provide insider information, he is merely remarking on how the Obama administration takes advantage of the event.
Related:
Convincing proof that the U.S. military is involved in running drugs out of Pakistan.
Britain plans to bribe the Taliban in Afghanistan as Bush bribed the insurgents in Iraq.
On foreign affairs you can learn a bit from socialist reporting as long as you remain extremely skeptical of their worldview imperative, that global socialism is superior to global capitalism and that Obama is superior to Bush. If you review these stories closely you can find the points where they jumped to conclusions without justification.
We have no inside information, only these reports. Sifting through them and discounting the bias, we believe Mossad manipulated a boy who appears to be a mind-controlled agent incapable of doing great damage as a kind of Christmas present to Obama to arouse public fears and justify his escalation of war in Yemen. The weak link in the U.S. security network is Mossad’s control of airport security. Reports of problems in the CIA and reports about al-qaeda in Yemen are red herrings designed to take attention away from the real actors.
About The Author
again.. you hit the nail with your sledgehammer for your lyal on top with your awesome post
There’s a wealth of information here. Thanks! I’ll be back for more.