'plain o joe'
Membership Revoked
http://www.bloomingtonalternative.com/subscribers/news.php?topicid=583
Terrorist warnings just
another way Bush will
steal election
August 8, 2004
by Jason Leopold
It's official. I'm a conspiracy
theorist.
I'm probably one of thousands –
maybe tens of thousands – who
believe President George W.
Bush will do anything to retain
control of the White House. It's
not safe to have a healthy dose
of skepticism like this these
days. But this has to be said. I
don't believe the country is going
to be attacked by al-Qaeda
anytime soon.
I don't care how specific the
so-called threat is. I don't care
how many targets have been
identified. I don't care how solid
this new information is. I don't
buy any of it. What I do believe is
whenever Bush's approval
ratings start slipping the
president's administration issues
a terrorist warning saying an
attack is imminent. Coincidence?
I don't think so.
Consider the evidence.
This past Memorial Day
weekend right through mid-June
Bush's approval ratings yo-yoed
due to bad news coming out of
the war in Iraq. By mid-June,
51% of Americans disapproved
of the way Bush was handling
the war in Iraq, up about four
points from May, according to
polling results from Zogby,
Gallup and Pew.
Bush was taking a beating in the
press in May and June because
of the Abu-Ghraib prison scandal
and the high number of American
military casualties the U.S.
suffered in Iraq. Then, seemingly
out of nowhere, on May 26,
Attorney General John Ashcroft
held a press conference warning
the public that al-Qaeda "wants
to hit America hard."
Ashcroft didn't release specific
information because he didn't
have any. He said that
somewhere in this country seven
al-Qaeda operatives were
planning an attack. That's hardly
information that warrants a press
conference. His announcement
didn't even elevate a change in
the color-coded terrorist alert
system. In fact, it was all a
smokescreen to change the
news cycle. It worked. Bush's
numbers went back up soon
after Ashcroft's press
conference.
However, the Wall Street Journal
reported a couple of days later
that the Department of Homeland
Security found that Ashcroft's
dire warnings of an attack on
American soil "had been known
for some time" and "was not new
or specific enough to merit an
announcement or other action."
Ashcroft cried wolf on a
half-dozen other occasions too:
last July 4, last Christmas, and
right before the Super Bowl, to
name a few. Those alleged
terrorist threats identified banks,
shopping malls, power plants and
stadiums, obvious targets for a
militant group that wants to rack
up a high number of casualties.
So when Homeland Security
Director Tom Ridge announced
Sunday that terrorists want to
blow up the Citicorp building in
Manhattan's financial district, the
World Bank and International
Monetary Fund in Washington,
D.C. and the Prudential Building
in Newark, N.J. the threat
seemed more real, more
imminent, because, for the first
time, we got specific information.
But as far as I'm concerned, the
Bush administration picked those
targets out of a hat. The only
way this administration can
rebuild its credibility is if one of
those targets is blown up or an
attack is thwarted.
Why? It just so happens that
every single terrorist warning
was issued whenever Bush's
approval ratings lagged and
when bad news was coming out
of the war in Iraq, such as the
failure to find any weapons of
mass destruction, the huge
financial cost of the war and a
shortage of troops. Need
evidence? Check
http://www.pollingreport.com and
then check the Department of
Homeland Security and the
Justice Department web sites
and you'll see how the terrorist
warnings were issued at the
same time Bush started to fall
behind in the polls.
The Australian newspaper, The
Age ran a Reuters story that
quoted unnamed senior U.S.
officials as saying that the
constant flow of terrorist
warnings since March 2003 "may
also just be a ploy to shore up
the president's job approval
ratings or divert attention from
the increasingly unpopular Iraq
campaign."
A few weeks before the
Democratic National Convention,
The New Republic ran a story
alleging that senior Pakistani
intelligence officials were
pressured by members of the
Bush administration to make
arrests of so-called high valued
terrorists during the Democratic
National Convention in an attempt
to boost Bush's standing in the
polls during a time when John
Kerry, the Democratic
Presidential nominee, would have
likely received a bounce in
percentage points for his
campaign.
The July 7 article, "July
Surprise", said a Pakistani official
was told by a White House aid
"that it would be best if the arrest
or killing of [any] HVT were
announced on twenty-six,
twenty-seven, or twenty-eight
July.' – the first three days of the
Democratic National Convention
in Boston."
That event actually occurred on
July 29 when Reuters reported
that an unidentified U.S. official
confirmed that Pakistan arrested
"a senior al Qaeda member
wanted by the United States in
connection with the 1998
bombings of two U.S. embassies
in East Africa," all of which lends
credibility to the fact that the
White House will do whatever it
has to do to make sure Bush is
re-elected.
Here's more proof. Last week, at
the end of the Democratic
National Convention, a
Newsweek poll showed
Democratic presidential nominee
John Kerry leading Bush in the
polls 52% to 44%. Less than
three days later, Ridge, Bush's
Homeland Security chief,
announces that al-Qaeda wants
to blow up targets in New York,
New Jersey and Washington,
D.C. The jury's still out on
whether the latest terrorist alert
will put Bush ahead of Kerry in
the race for the White House.
Bush has said on numerous
occasions that America is safer
since the overthrow of Iraq's
former dictator Saddam Hussein.
But on Monday, Bush told
reporters "America is in danger."
Last Friday, while campaigning in
Missouri and other battleground
states Bush said "America has
turned a corner."
Talk about flip-flopping.
Jason Leopold is a freelance
writer living in Beverly Hills,
Calif. He just finished writing a
book about the California energy
crisis and the Enron bankruptcy,
due out in March through
Rowman & Littlefield.
Terrorist warnings just
another way Bush will
steal election
August 8, 2004
by Jason Leopold
It's official. I'm a conspiracy
theorist.
I'm probably one of thousands –
maybe tens of thousands – who
believe President George W.
Bush will do anything to retain
control of the White House. It's
not safe to have a healthy dose
of skepticism like this these
days. But this has to be said. I
don't believe the country is going
to be attacked by al-Qaeda
anytime soon.
I don't care how specific the
so-called threat is. I don't care
how many targets have been
identified. I don't care how solid
this new information is. I don't
buy any of it. What I do believe is
whenever Bush's approval
ratings start slipping the
president's administration issues
a terrorist warning saying an
attack is imminent. Coincidence?
I don't think so.
Consider the evidence.
This past Memorial Day
weekend right through mid-June
Bush's approval ratings yo-yoed
due to bad news coming out of
the war in Iraq. By mid-June,
51% of Americans disapproved
of the way Bush was handling
the war in Iraq, up about four
points from May, according to
polling results from Zogby,
Gallup and Pew.
Bush was taking a beating in the
press in May and June because
of the Abu-Ghraib prison scandal
and the high number of American
military casualties the U.S.
suffered in Iraq. Then, seemingly
out of nowhere, on May 26,
Attorney General John Ashcroft
held a press conference warning
the public that al-Qaeda "wants
to hit America hard."
Ashcroft didn't release specific
information because he didn't
have any. He said that
somewhere in this country seven
al-Qaeda operatives were
planning an attack. That's hardly
information that warrants a press
conference. His announcement
didn't even elevate a change in
the color-coded terrorist alert
system. In fact, it was all a
smokescreen to change the
news cycle. It worked. Bush's
numbers went back up soon
after Ashcroft's press
conference.
However, the Wall Street Journal
reported a couple of days later
that the Department of Homeland
Security found that Ashcroft's
dire warnings of an attack on
American soil "had been known
for some time" and "was not new
or specific enough to merit an
announcement or other action."
Ashcroft cried wolf on a
half-dozen other occasions too:
last July 4, last Christmas, and
right before the Super Bowl, to
name a few. Those alleged
terrorist threats identified banks,
shopping malls, power plants and
stadiums, obvious targets for a
militant group that wants to rack
up a high number of casualties.
So when Homeland Security
Director Tom Ridge announced
Sunday that terrorists want to
blow up the Citicorp building in
Manhattan's financial district, the
World Bank and International
Monetary Fund in Washington,
D.C. and the Prudential Building
in Newark, N.J. the threat
seemed more real, more
imminent, because, for the first
time, we got specific information.
But as far as I'm concerned, the
Bush administration picked those
targets out of a hat. The only
way this administration can
rebuild its credibility is if one of
those targets is blown up or an
attack is thwarted.
Why? It just so happens that
every single terrorist warning
was issued whenever Bush's
approval ratings lagged and
when bad news was coming out
of the war in Iraq, such as the
failure to find any weapons of
mass destruction, the huge
financial cost of the war and a
shortage of troops. Need
evidence? Check
http://www.pollingreport.com and
then check the Department of
Homeland Security and the
Justice Department web sites
and you'll see how the terrorist
warnings were issued at the
same time Bush started to fall
behind in the polls.
The Australian newspaper, The
Age ran a Reuters story that
quoted unnamed senior U.S.
officials as saying that the
constant flow of terrorist
warnings since March 2003 "may
also just be a ploy to shore up
the president's job approval
ratings or divert attention from
the increasingly unpopular Iraq
campaign."
A few weeks before the
Democratic National Convention,
The New Republic ran a story
alleging that senior Pakistani
intelligence officials were
pressured by members of the
Bush administration to make
arrests of so-called high valued
terrorists during the Democratic
National Convention in an attempt
to boost Bush's standing in the
polls during a time when John
Kerry, the Democratic
Presidential nominee, would have
likely received a bounce in
percentage points for his
campaign.
The July 7 article, "July
Surprise", said a Pakistani official
was told by a White House aid
"that it would be best if the arrest
or killing of [any] HVT were
announced on twenty-six,
twenty-seven, or twenty-eight
July.' – the first three days of the
Democratic National Convention
in Boston."
That event actually occurred on
July 29 when Reuters reported
that an unidentified U.S. official
confirmed that Pakistan arrested
"a senior al Qaeda member
wanted by the United States in
connection with the 1998
bombings of two U.S. embassies
in East Africa," all of which lends
credibility to the fact that the
White House will do whatever it
has to do to make sure Bush is
re-elected.
Here's more proof. Last week, at
the end of the Democratic
National Convention, a
Newsweek poll showed
Democratic presidential nominee
John Kerry leading Bush in the
polls 52% to 44%. Less than
three days later, Ridge, Bush's
Homeland Security chief,
announces that al-Qaeda wants
to blow up targets in New York,
New Jersey and Washington,
D.C. The jury's still out on
whether the latest terrorist alert
will put Bush ahead of Kerry in
the race for the White House.
Bush has said on numerous
occasions that America is safer
since the overthrow of Iraq's
former dictator Saddam Hussein.
But on Monday, Bush told
reporters "America is in danger."
Last Friday, while campaigning in
Missouri and other battleground
states Bush said "America has
turned a corner."
Talk about flip-flopping.
Jason Leopold is a freelance
writer living in Beverly Hills,
Calif. He just finished writing a
book about the California energy
crisis and the Enron bankruptcy,
due out in March through
Rowman & Littlefield.
