Is America About To Be Hit Again?
By Jim E. Reames (04/22/03)
Is America about to be hit again by another terrorist attack? That’s an important question at any time, but of greater significance, when the world’s eyes are looking ahead at the 2004 presidential elections. Let’s begin with Russia.
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin’s adamant stand against George W. Bush via the UN makes me ask “Why?” when on the surface. . .and with display of our muscle and might in Iraq. . .the United States of America is the only superpower left in this world. We hold purse strings to the largest economic power. And we are, by far, the most scientifically advanced people on earth? Our mission to fight terrorism is clear. Our motives are pure. We have a president who, who like the late John F. Kennedy, is unafraid to fight back. And after 9-11 we had justification to do so.
Why, then, would the president of a struggling nation, one that is still picking itself up by its own shoestrings following the August 19, 1991 military coup that ousted the old Soviet Union decide to snub his so-called “friend” President George W. Bush over United Nations Sanctions unless Putin is looking at a possible larger picture later on down the road of history?
What does Russia’s Vladimir Putin possibly see that many Americans do not yet see? More importantly, where does it go from here? And how much danger is the United States still in? Is America about to be hit again? And what about President Bush, himself?
Some homeland defense analysts might say, “No!” “America,” they might add, “is not about to be hit again.” They may claim that the Patriot Act is a success and that the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, and the NSC are all working in harmony with state and local law enforcement, which is only somewhat true. America, I believe, is far better prepared to counteract terrorism today than it was on September 11, 2001, in part because of awareness and in part because the Patriot Act (scheduled to expire after 5 years) has provided our intelligence community good and workable tools that have prevented secondary attacks. But does that guarantee there will be no more major attacks? Was the recent downward shift of alert condition Orange-to-Yellow because the threat is lower? Or was that a ploy in hopes of stimulating Wall Street? I see it as being a little of each, not to mention the hourly cost of remaining at alert level Orange.
To answer our main question we need to ask ourselves two vital questions, the first being “Who wants to contain and control the United States?” Second, “Who wants to destroy us?” We must also come to the resolve that if President George W. Bush gets re-elected that he will tighten down the ratchet on the root perpetrators of terrorism. That is because President Bush possesses a very keen understanding of Twenty-First Century asymmetric war modus operandi. So let’s take a snapshot view of the developing master plan for the potential of WW-III.
On the sideline we see China, a nation like France, Germany, and Russia that wants to receive financial gains by extending the hand of corporate and academic friendship with the United States while simultaneously offering the hand of war and terrorism assistance to nations like North Korea, Syria, and Iran---who want America destroyed. In fact, North Korea could not survive without the direct support of China. Just about everyone knows that! Of equal importance the recent UN boycott nations of France, Germany, and Russia are all in financial difficulty, meaning they desperately need direct and residual United States economic assistance. That is to say, that without a financial infusion France, Germany, and Russia are predestined for enormous change in upcoming years which represents a threat to that leadership and to their philosophies. In short, socialism cannot economically survive socialism.
The aforementioned postulate makes the United States of America a world banker. But it also fans the flames of jealousy and hatred. This, in turn, sets the stage for the saying, “The enemy of my friend is my friend” so to speak, which explains the very strong political, economic, and military assistance on the part of France, Germany, and Russia being extended to the former leader of Iraq. (I find it interesting that one of the busiest places in Syria these days is the French Embassy because they are cranking out visa papers like funny money. I’ll even wager that for the right amount of money, passed under the table, there are fake IDs being printed. Iraqi mustaches are being shaved and new photos, with new names, are likely being produced.)
I believe China, Russia, Germany, and France all want America “contained” and “controlled” but not “destroyed” because we represent a cash cow that is simply too rich to kill. The leaders of France, Germany, Russia and China know that countries like Iran and Syria, even North Korea, are no military match against America’s massive war machine. But if those nations can be propped up and encouraged to bring stress on America it will hopefully eat away at our national stamina and our commitment to fight terrorism, just like negative stimuli eroded our commitment to win the Vietnam War.
We need to keep in mind that because of modern media and our need for constant positive stimuli (one of the true shortcomings of Wall Street and voter decision) most American voters’ possess very short memories. Moreover, it is fairly certain on the part of Democrats that most Americans are going to vote their wallets in the 2004 election. For that reason alone Democrats will resist and fight anything and everything President Bush sends to the hill in the form of economic stimulus bills. But what a few Democrats might be silently hoping for is some huge surprise, for example another major attack on US soil in the late spring or summer of 2004 that will prove an enormous political embarrassment to the homeland defense efforts of the entire Bush Administration. (This was the opening and closing theme of my master’s degree thesis on homeland defense and terrorism that predicts such an attack may occur between April 2003 and August 2004.)
If my hypothesis is correct, America has hard challenges ahead of itself. We may have even crossed over the threshold of WW-III without fully realizing why.
“Containment and Control” vs. “Total Destruction” of the United States is an important concept because anyone who seriously studies the modus operandi of the Russian Mafia and of other organized crime syndicates will quickly agree just how much American wealth has been siphoned since the advent of the World Wide Web and globalization. Hence, there may be reason why Bill Clinton wants to be at the top of the UN. Just like Vladimir Putin, he is a behind the scenes guy these days, meeting with and stroking key players who have anti-Bush UN influence.
I first began to see definite sides for fighting WW-III were forming back in December of 2000 when, in the Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle Newspaper, there was a small article about how Russia was attempting to establish middle and far east connections for the sole purpose of giving birth to a new Warsaw Pact. According to the article, “. . .the goal, officials said, would be to counter NATO’s growing influence.” That hoped for alliance was to include other friends of Moscow such as China and even India. The new, Twenty-First Century Warsaw Pact was to be far different than its Cold War predecessor, where computer technology and organized crime would out pace and out distance heavy armor. Moscow was attempting to combine the hacking skills of the Russian Mafia (some of the best on earth) with the programming skills of India and the Cybernetic warfare energies of China. What we need to remember is companies in India received many big contracts to fix Y2K glitches in America’s many computer databases, some operated by the federal government, during the Clinton Administration. To the dismay of the General Accounting Office government-proprietary-source-code was even exported to sub-contractors abroad during that era. (…talk about giving away the farm!)
Russia’s pre-September 11, 2001 mood did not surprise me because in the fall of 2000 it was Russian hackers who had successfully penetrated the security of Microsoft to download the Windows Operating System source code all the way to St. Petersburg, with the hint China was a co-conspirator (ComputerWord Magazine, January 21, 2001). In fact, it became quite apparent that the post-Gorbachev Russia of 1991 possessed little interest in freedom when its new political leadership began cracking down on newspaper journalists, as reported on page A16 of the New York Post on December 28, 2000. Putin actually signed into law and then rallied his nation’s youth to revive and restore Stalin’s Anthem (Reuters, December 26, 2000). Thus, I have not felt comfortable with him since day number one. The recent three hour long Berry Farber interview of Colonel Stanislav Lunev reinforces my belief. Now, the largest headache of cops who track and investigate organized crime is the theft of personal identification for the sake of suckling from the tit of free enterprise!
We Americans need to remember that Vladimir Putin was (a) trained by the KGB—all the way to the top. Following the collapse of the old Soviet Union many of those unemployed KGB experts became some of the world’s best hackers. And Putin is a marshal arts expert, meaning he is skilled at deflecting and diverting energy to his best combat advantage. A third variable, that of asymmetric warfare is to get someone else to do your fighting—and to do so without leaving your own fingerprints on the murder weapon. What better third party is there to support than religious and/or political fanatics who are willing to die for their cause. Hence, “The enemy of my friend is my friend” political stand has taken root. The Old Soviet Union, a part of which is the modern day Russia, that Ronald Reagan called “evil” still appears to be “evil.” There is even hard evidence coming from Iraq that Russia hacked and recorded the private phone calls of Britain’s Tony Blair, translated to suggest Moscow has the know how to hack high up phone calls here in the United States just as easily.
I believe Vladimir Putin did not side with George W. Bush on the Iraq issue because Puttin is most likely looking ahead to a post-Bush administration. Like a well disciplined opposing party bureaucrat he is sitting Bush out until a Democrat can repair America’s relationship with the United Nations. Conversely, getting rid of George W. Bush any way they can is also a logical move. The desire to get rid of Bush may even be paramount to the motives for the public assassination of John F. Kennedy. It may even come to the gamble of another terrorist attack on the United States during the Bush re-election campaign to make his homeland defense appear inept
Such an attack need not be as large as were the 9-11 hits on New York City and the Pentagon. It need not kill as many people. But in order to embarrass President Bush, Tom Ridge, Condolisa Rice, VP Chaney, and John Ashcroft the attack will have to be daring. It must---and still can be---a total surprise. And it must also hit some target of significance—for example the entire infrastructure of the State of California. With those factors satisfied the Democratic Party would attempt to symbolically chop off the heads of Tom Ridge, Condolisa Rice, VP Chaney, and John Ashcroft so they could be handed back to George Bush on a platter---in full public view---blood on a pink dress!
For the sake of discussion: Try, if you will, to envision a major attack on the west coast of the United States (from Oregon to Mexico), one aimed at all Pacific Rim economics on a day between April of 2003 and August of 2004. Now try, if you will, to emulate the burst of Democratic Party finger-pointing response within one year of the 2004 presidential election. Focus on what the impact would be on Wall Street. Try to visualize law and order with most of our national guardsmen possibly abroad, unable to render immediate support to state and local law enforcement. Visualize overwhelming west coast physical damage with (or without) the use of WMDs, the attack executed by fewer than 15 human assets. Visualize blame for the attack aimed at someone other than China, France, Germany, Russia, or even our own homegrown militants like Craig Rosebraugh—spokesperson for the Earth Liberation Front.
Just when President Bush needs to be concentrating heavily on our economy the last thing he needs to preoccupy himself with is a nuisance terrorist attack on American soil, or another Washington, D. C. sniper. That is precisely why we may get hit again! Of course there is always the risk such an attack would all but seal American votes for him, too.
Minus such an attack men like Putin will work behind the scenes with their newly formed allies in France, Germany, the United Nations---and some here in America who also think this nation should be “contained and controlled” in the name of world peace. In other words, the State Department in the upcoming months may give the enormous victory won by our military away on the plate of reconciliation. There are even domestic enemies who want America destroyed!
On this very hour President George W. Bush is weighing what to do about the rogue nations of Syria, Iran, and North Korea while at the same time starting to launch a serious campaign for re-election. For that responsibility of office I do not envy our president, yielding instead in personal prayer asking for God to grant President Bush both wisdom and courage---at a time when the Democratic Party will do just about anything (ANYTHING) to avenge the 2000 election defeat of Al Gore, even if it means the erosion of our retirement accounts and the desired continuation of a sluggish economy.
Based upon the recent publicly televised comments I’ve heard made by a couple of elected officials (members of congress) I’m of the personal belief one or more would not personally lift a finger to prevent another terrorist attack on America if such would harm the popularity of President Bush. If that thought is true it is a sad day in American history because it demonstrates our elected officials are more interested in centralized Washington, D. C. power than they are about America as a whole. This is the natural evolution of centralized power.
America, I know from academic and professional research, has enemies both foreign and domestic. I believe that as a nation we may have already crossed over the threshold of WW-III on September 11, 2001, without many Americans comprehending how this has transpired. This may, in reality, be just as powerful of a thrust as was Lyndon B. Johnson’s desire for combat in Vietnam even before John F. Kennedy was put to final rest.
In this hour of victory it is easy for us to all be joyful, even proud. It is even tempting to feel superior as a nation, but that might be a very huge mistake. It might be a false security, for our war on terrorism is a very complex one. We are just starting it and there are many hard bumps in the road ahead. If the threshold of WW-III is now truly crossed then we Americans have a lot to prepare for as a society---and as individuals. The lie that the liberal pacifists have been successful in communicating is that freedom is a human right! Yet, history of the human race says just the opposite. The raw nature of man is no different today than it was when Cain murdered Abel and the only way for America to realize any semblance of peace is through enormous military strength, supplemented by even greater Christian faith, and getting our nation out of financial debt. I predict that the United States of America may get hit again in the spring or the summer of 2004, just before the next presidential election and with time enough for the liberal left to publicly discredit the Bush Administration. Because asymmetric hypothetical war games are my academic discipline, I predict it could come as early as this summer. I hope---I SINCERELY HOPE---that I’m wrong! I also pray for the personal safety of President George W. Bush because the last time we had a president---so willing to stand firm---against the terrorism of WMD he was taken out with a so-called “Magic bullet” in Dallas, Texas.
Disclaimer: This article is my own personal opinion and is in no way reflected to my duties working for the federal government.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Jim E. Reames
