Loose Brains: Former Reaganite Edition

Michael C. Moynihan | July 18, 2007

Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury and National Review Contributing Editor Paul Craig Roberts writes in his latest Counterpunch column—yes, that Counterpunch—that the Bush administration will likely stage "false-flag" terror operations to justify an attack on Iran:

Bush has put in place all the necessary measures for dictatorship in the form of "executive orders" that are triggered whenever Bush declares a national emergency. Recent statements by Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff, former Republican senator Rick Santorum and others suggest that Americans might expect a series of staged, or false flag, "terrorist" events in the near future.

...

If the Bush administration wants to continue its wars in the Middle East and to entrench the "unitary executive" at home, it will have to conduct some false flag operations that will both frighten and anger the American people and make them accept Bush's declaration of "national emergency" and the return of the draft. Alternatively, the administration could simply allow any real terrorist plot to proceed without hindrance.

A series of staged or permitted attacks would be spun by the captive media as a vindication of the neoconsevatives' (sic) Islamophobic policy, the intention of which is to destroy all Middle Eastern governments that are not American puppet states. Success would give the US control over oil, but the main purpose is to eliminate any resistance to Israel's complete absorption of Palestine into Greater Israel.

Roberts, who also contributes to VDare and Antiwar.com—and, once upon a time, contributed to this magazine—is no stranger to wacky false-flag theories. In a 2006 Counterpunch article, he showed considerable interest in the 9/11 conspiracy theories, wondering if the Oneonta Truth Squad was on to something after all:

Other readers write that 9/11 shields Bush from accountability, They challenge me to explain why three World Trade Center buildings on one day collapsed into their own footprints at free fall speed, an event outside the laws of physics except under conditions of controlled demolition. They insist that there is no stopping war and a police state as long as the government's story on 9/11 remains unchallenged.

They could be right.

Except that they are wrong.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

|7.18.07 @ 4:12PM|#

I have it on good information that all of the government employees directly involved in the 9/11 hoax are living on our secret base on the Moon.

|7.18.07 @ 4:14PM|#

Good one, but I can top it!

Get this: some nuts have said that the CIA has been operating secret prisons in Europe!

|7.18.07 @ 4:15PM|#

Where is the obligatory reference to Operation Northwoods? Was that imaginary, too?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Yes, it was stopped before being implemented--it was a crazy Pentagon plan back when the Pentagon was loaded with crazies (like Curtis LeMay) and the civilian government was populated by rational beings. I am not so sure about the latter any longer.

I don't find a manufactured "Gulf of Tonkin" incident hard to believe at all. Roberts's concern is harder to swallow--but not completely impossible.

|7.18.07 @ 4:17PM|#

Trying to pitch reason to 9/11 truthers is like trying to sell Southern Baptists on atheism. It's a good way to distill your own beliefs, but changing minds is pretty much out of play.

|7.18.07 @ 4:18PM|#

They challenge me to explain why three World Trade Center buildings on one day collapsed into their own footprints at free fall speed, an event outside the laws of physics except under conditions of controlled demolition.

I love it when the journalists who know nothing about science try to state as fact something that would take trained engineers a while to answer.

It reminds me of that clip of Rosie O'Donnell when she was saying that steel is impervious to fire.

Oh, Oh, let me this time!

but the main purpose is to eliminate any resistance to Israel's complete absorption of Palestine into Greater Israel

It's the Joos!

ed|7.18.07 @ 4:21PM|#

Journalists are both cynical and gullible.

|7.18.07 @ 4:21PM|#

Seriously - when did H&R commenters decide that the we should be skeptical of all government claims except for those regarding 9/11, which are so true as to be beyond questioning, except by crazy people?

It's worth noting that Roberts no longer supports free trade: http://www.vdare.com/roberts/second_thoughts.htm

"In the past, we have supported free trade policies. But if the case for free trade is undermined by changes in the global economy, our policies should reflect the new realities."

The "we" in the above comment refers to Roberts and N.Y. Senator Chuck Schumer, BTW.

|7.18.07 @ 4:24PM|#

|7.18.07 @ 4:26PM|#

They challenge me to explain why three World Trade Center buildings on one day collapsed into their own footprints at free fall speed, an event outside the laws of physics except under conditions of controlled demolition.

Except they did NOT fall at free-fall speeds. There are photos showing debris falling faster than the building. There were plumes of debris falling faster than the building itself.

The key questions the Truthers raise have ALL been answered, and backed by the evidence. But the Truthers refuse to listen to the answer and continue to deny any evidence that does not validate their delusions. Their latest claims is that much of their debunked evidence was planted in order to make them look foolish. One guy even declared, "don't trust any facts!"

And now we have predictions of false-flag operations. Sigh. This means that ANY terrorist attack will be "proof" of conspiracy.

Dan T.

While there is undoubtedly a lot of hidden facts about 9/11, the facts that just can't be hidden--like the fucking planes flying into the towers--are hard to jibe with many of the conspiracy theories, unless you believe in an uber-competent Bush Administration able to pull off multiple layers of intricate deception. And who believes that?

I agree, but it seems that people have grouped all people with some level of suspicion about those events in with the most fringe elements.

That's really what Rep. Ellison was saying the other day - to ask what the government did know or did do is to be marginalized as a nut.

|7.18.07 @ 4:27PM|#

I love it when the journalists who know nothing about science try to state as fact something that would take trained engineers a while to answer

I love it when people in general who know nothing about the subject of discussion try to state as fact something that would take a person educated on the subject a while to answer. This is most certainly the situation with many who believe global warming to be true. It doesn't mean they're wrong, but they need to shut their arrogant asses up if they couldn't argue a counter point with someone who provided intelligent perspective.

Silly, Pro Libertate, we don't have bases on the moon because we never went there. It was a studio set in Arizona.

But I don't think the government would actually stage terrorist attacks, at least not successfully. But, if pressed, they might be less than vigillant about catching real terrorists.

Of course, given that Bin Laden still hasn't been brought to justice six years after the fact, I think being lax about catching real terrorists is SOP for this administration.

|7.18.07 @ 4:30PM|#

This means that ANY terrorist attack will be "proof" of conspiracy.

Just like everything the weather does is "proof" of global warming.

"Man, it's hot"
Global Warming

"Man, it's cold"
Global Warming

"Man, we need rain"
Global Warming

"Man, it rains a lot"
Global Warming

When you look for things to support your conclusion you see evidence everywhere.

|7.18.07 @ 4:31PM|#

Well, I agree with you there Dan. Some here have decided to lump any questions with the most deranged of conspiracies.

But back to the original post--WHY are false flag operations beyond consideration. Positing 9-11 as one seems crazy because of the logistics involved--but do people here think there is actually some "moral" boderline that our governing scumbags would not cross?

Jesus fucking Christ--you people never learn.

John Payne|7.18.07 @ 4:33PM|#

While the 9/11 stuff is nuts, I think it may actually be crazier to believe that a high level of capital mobility destroys the case for comparative advantage and free trade.

|7.18.07 @ 4:35PM|#

CFisher,

Why, that can't be! I just got an e-mail from Luna City mayor Jack Kennedy telling me so. And telling me that he and Marilyn are fine, as is their adopted son, Jim Morrison.

For me, evil government actions aren't completely unthinkable, but 9/11 conspiracies make no sense at all. Not technically, not logically, not psychologically, not even evil government strategically.

As for faking attacks, why not fake evidence to bolster the Iraq war's justifications? I think there are limits, even with this wacky fun administration.

|7.18.07 @ 4:37PM|#

but do people here think there is actually some "moral" boderline that our governing scumbags would not cross?

not I

|7.18.07 @ 4:38PM|#

"That's really what Rep. Ellison was saying the other day - to ask what the government did know or did do is to be marginalized as a nut."

Ellison is my congressman so I can tell you first hand that he IS a nut.

|7.18.07 @ 4:39PM|#

Ok, that Energized Democrat *snark* comment above was me forgetting to change my name back because my browser keeps resetting it. It was nothing an energized Democrat would say, nor was it snarky.

|7.18.07 @ 4:41PM|#

"As for faking attacks, why not fake evidence to bolster the Iraq war's justifications?"

It is too late for that--but I'd bet there are those in the administration who wish they had. Do you doubt that?

|7.18.07 @ 4:43PM|#

The problem with this theory - I mean, besides the obvious problems - is that the Bush administration is so widely, deeply loathed and distrusted that the public wouldn't fall for it.

Everyone remembers how supine and obedient the country became after 9/11/01. Well, there's been a lot of water under the bridge since then. People would be more likely to lynch Bush than idolize him if similar attack took place tomorrow.

Paul|7.18.07 @ 4:44PM|#

Seriously - when did H&R commenters decide that the we should be skeptical of all government claims except for those regarding 9/11

When we saw two planes fly into the World Trade Centers, and the government announced: "Holy shit, two planes just flew into the World Trade Centers!!!"

|7.18.07 @ 4:47PM|#

henry,

Yes, I do. I don't think they are such paragons of virtue that some of them wouldn't do any variety of evil things; rather, I think they know that even "secret" stuff like our black ops are too much in the spotlight, ultimately, to allow them to act with impunity. Unless we really get a Caesar someday who is willing to seize power, that type of behavior remains unlikely in any major way.

Where I think nonsense is most likely to occur is in the purely political venue, like using government employees to campaign inappropriately, that sort of thing. Where plausible deniability exists. Unlike when one crashes a plane into a building or blows it up with preplanted dynamite.

You don't have to make every lizard in your house out to be Godzilla.

Bush is a vile scumbag without having to assign him the blame Truthers want to for 9/11. At this point the people who aren't going to think he's a vile scumbag won't be convinced of any evidence to the contrary. So, all they are really doing is boring the rest of us by preaching to choir and polishing a turd.

And, on a purely practical note, libertarianism has spent years scrubbing itself clean of its associations with all conspiracy theorists, whether we deserved that association or not. Stop trying to get us on your side; were sick of being a laughingstock about anything other than our electability.

jj|7.18.07 @ 4:48PM|#

Obviously there is no way 9/11 was an inside job.
The one aspect I initially found fishy was flight 93.
I think it's just possible that if we had to shoot down a passenger jet, even though it would have been the right thing to do, the government might take convenient facts and concoct a more palatable story. Here's a link to a blog discussing this:
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1001/1001flight93.htm

I think in all likelihood the official story even on that aspect is probably close to true, but I remember some goofy stuff at the time. For instance, the white house floated a story that Bush didn't return to DC because there was a "credible" threat to Air Force One where the threatening party had used a code word that lent the threat validity. This story was later admitted to be false. Again, just goofy. It was perfectly rational for Bush to go to Nebraska. There was no telling what was going to happen. But instead of just saying that, a lie was told.
And one goofy bit of follow up: Rumsfeld fanned the flames on this conspiracy theory when giving a speech over in Iraq. He said something about the terrorists "shooting down" the plane over Pennsylvania.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/27/rumsfeld.flt93/

Again, I don't really know. I never for a second believed the wackier theories. But I do believe this bunch quite capable (and in other cases, quite guilty) of selling some BS to justify what they believed needed done.

Paul|7.18.07 @ 4:48PM|#

Well, there's been a lot of water under the bridge since then. People would be more likely to lynch Bush than idolize him if similar attack took place tomorrow.

Maybe. Ok, probably. But if I sit around a table with a bunch of Bush Loathers (yours truly included), it's hard to get around the fact that there have been no Al Qaeda attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11. Now before everyone jumps all over me for the obvious, let me just say, I know.

However, it can still be argued that our aggressive tactics (regardless of how unconstitutional they are) may be working to some degree. This doesn't mean we should keep engaging in illegal activities (read unconstitutional) but it suggests that the Bush administration may have disrupted something effectively.

You may all feel free to pile on now.

thoreau|7.18.07 @ 4:49PM|#

Paul wins the thread.

thoreau|7.18.07 @ 4:50PM|#

Aw, man, now he has to make a serious comment. It's a perfectly fine serious comment, but it's not the one I was referring to.

He won the thread with his 4:44 pm comment.

|7.18.07 @ 4:51PM|#

Reinmoose,

If structural engineers were as universally convinced that the World Trade Center was demolished as climate scientists are that human-induced global warming was happening, I'd state their position as fact, too.

You see, the educated people have already put in plenty of time answering the question of whether global warming is happening, so I'm quite comfortable repeating their conclusions and blowing off the "little bit of learning" crowd.

Paul|7.18.07 @ 4:53PM|#

He won the thread with his 4:44 pm comment.

I figured that was the one you were talking about.

|7.18.07 @ 4:53PM|#

Paul,

The theoretical being discussed here is "what if there is another terrorist attack."

Hence, the "We haven't been attacked" argument wouldn't really come into it.

|7.18.07 @ 4:55PM|#

Paul, I suppose the obvious means that there were no domestic AQ attacks for the eight years between 1993 and 2001 (although a big one was foiled in 2000)--is that what you mean?

Paul|7.18.07 @ 4:55PM|#

The theoretical being discussed here is "what if there is another terrorist attack."

Hence, the "We haven't been attacked" argument wouldn't really come into it.

I understand that, and I wasn't trying to refute what you were saying, as much as I was trying (in a roundabout way) to suggest that depending on how another terrorist attack might unfold, it could reinvitorate Bush's approval ratings. My point: You never can tell. For the record, I think you're probably right.

|7.18.07 @ 4:58PM|#

joe -
It's one thing to blow them off and not take their opinions into consideration. It's an entirely other matter if you treat them like shit for believing what they believe, and their basis for their beliefs happens to be studies they've done, and your basis for your beliefs (not YOU you, but the general you) is that you read a lot of articles about it and saw a documentary.

Paul|7.18.07 @ 5:01PM|#

Henry:

No. I'm merely pointing out the fact that no matter how much you grumble about the Bush administration and their "terror phantoms", scare tactics, and clearly unconstitutional forays into domestic surveillance, we haven't had any domestic AQ attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11. I'm not trying to give Mr. Bush mad props, I'm merely trying to make an honest point that it's something the administration can repeatedly point to as a success. Joe's "what if point" might not play out as he suggests because the Bush administration may successfully spin a Democratic congress and subsequent "weakening" of the WoT on the reasons for said theoretical attack. If my posts are getting confrusing or abstract, I apologize.

|7.18.07 @ 5:03PM|#

I'm sorry, I'm mostly referring to exchanges that go like this:
Scientist: well actually, the climate change in this particular part of the world can be attributed to blah blah blah. I studied it for the blah blah Institute.
Regular guy: GLOBAL WARMING! AHHHHHH! YOU HATE ANIMALS!! WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!

Not quite that extreme, but I hope you get my gist.

Note: I'm educated in economics, and this happens to me all the time from people who have only taken ECON 101 or so (if that).

|7.18.07 @ 5:07PM|#

Paul,

I think the administration has screwed up most of what it's touched in one way or the other; however, I do think the net result of the United States responding to 9/11 by destroying two Middle Eastern (using that term liberally) governments was a substantial deterrent effect to additional terrorist attacks.

Regardless of the problems of the occupations, the terrorists who might think about hitting the U.S. have got to be thinking, "Wow, it took about a grand total of about three weeks for the United States to topple two governments. Maybe not a good idea to hit them directly." I think this is not only true, I think it was why most terrorists had left the U.S. homeland alone in the past. Far from being amazingly clever, I think al Qaeda and bin Laden were amazingly stupid. We're violent in a big way when provoked.

What I don't think is that the continued occupation of Iraq, conducting or outsourcing torture or torture-lite, acting outside of Constitutional authority, or violating our civil liberties has done anything to stop terrorism.

We may end up washing our hands of the whole Middle East someday soon, but I have a feeling our European friends will take up the slack in our absence. With all of the ruthlessness that they exercise when their interests are really threatened. Then we can sigh and shake our heads.

Mahmoud Ahmed|7.18.07 @ 5:14PM|#

Mahmoud Ahmed, the former Pakistani ISI chief had a close relationship with our CIA and top intelligence people - and in fact was eating breakfast with them during the 9/11 attacks.

Later it India intelligence reviled that he was the one funding Mohammed Atta. The U.S. never did anything about it.

Who funded the hijackers and who he associated with and who told the ISI "It's okay to fund al-qaeda as long as we can go into Afghanistan and build our oil pipelines" is MUCH more important than it's being given attention too

And we also have the whole problem that the CIA has been funding what is now al-qaeda in Afghanistan via the ISI since 1979.

And people who think 'false flag' operations are whacky simply don't know history - it's been a standard political weapon for thousands of years.

|7.18.07 @ 5:22PM|#

There is a huge distance between the observation that the administration has exploited the reactions to 9/11 to serve its own ends and the conclusion that they actually planned 9/11.

Considering the competence of the current administration, if they'd wanted to blow up the WTC, they probably would have wound up imploding the Kingdome in Seattle.

;P

Paul|7.18.07 @ 5:23PM|#

What I don't think is that the continued occupation of Iraq, conducting or outsourcing torture or torture-lite, acting outside of Constitutional authority, or violating our civil liberties has done anything to stop terrorism.

Pro-L

Bingo. Which leads us into the realm of the 'but-for' argument. One branch of government can put a halt to (or slow down, or, let's face it, make a lot of wind about) these assaults on civil liberties, and the first time a "successful"* attack on U.S. soil occurs, Bush's approval ratings might take a jump when Bush suggests that the attack wouldn't have occurred but for the weakening of executive authority.

*successful could be defined as two crazy nuts in an SUV driving into a Greyhound bus station while yelling "death to America!!!", incinerating themselves and doing a few thousand dollars in property damage with the intent to "disrupt the U.S. economy".

scandalrag|7.18.07 @ 5:23PM|#

Mahmoud,

Wait, the Indian Intelligence service says that there was a Pakistani involved! Wow, with sober, disinterested parties like that making a claim, it must be true.

Paul|7.18.07 @ 5:25PM|#

they probably would have wound up imploding the Kingdome in Seattle.

OMG, is that what happened?

|7.18.07 @ 5:29PM|#

joe,

I suspect Reinmoose was referring to some of the more outlandish claims of global warming affirmers, not the cautious claims of climate scientists. Al Gore's testimony/performance before Congress in January that the mildness of the winter up to that point confirmed that global warming was an imminent crisis, comes to mind. I don't know if he retracted that after February and March were colder than a b**ch, but in any case, if global warming does happen, it's going to be a very gradual process, with temperature changes only detectable by careful record keeping over several years. It's not like the average winter temperature in Boston is going to be 75 degrees.

|7.18.07 @ 5:31PM|#

scandalrag,

Wait, the Bush administration says that Osama was involved! Wow, with sober disinterested parties like that making a claim, it must be true!

Too bad the FBI can't confirm Osama's connection like they did the ISI connection!

Paul|7.18.07 @ 5:40PM|#

Al Gore's testimony/performance

Al Gore has always been the worst spokesperson for the environment, bar none. If Al Gore said that the sun would rise in the East, tomorrow, I'd be looking West.

|7.18.07 @ 5:43PM|#

True story--Al Gore made an appearance at a private social club across from my law school (in 1995, I think). Outside were many protesters, most of whom were protesting his betrayal on environmental issues. This, of course, was back when he was VP and could've actually done something.

|7.18.07 @ 5:45PM|#

PL,

We may end up washing our hands of the whole Middle East someday soon...

Not bloody likely (soon, anyway). WAY too big of a growing market for several of our export industries.

|7.18.07 @ 5:47PM|#

I don't get this 'global warming' discussion... for global warming to be false, prominent scientists of much higher caliber of those at 'Popular mechanics' would have to be lying to us for political reasons.

Are you global warming detractors suggesting corruption and a vast conspiracy in the scientific community?

Jne|7.18.07 @ 5:48PM|#

The 9/11 attackers are in the White House, at the Pentagon, at Langley, Virginia.. WHAT!? 9/11/2001, Pentagon. Where is the Boeing 757-sized hole? In fact, where is the Boeing 757? - http://i12.tinypic.com/6c7rm6t.jpg

Tinfoil salesman|7.18.07 @ 5:55PM|#

Mr Young,

I have an on good authority from a KGB informant that 'global warming' is conspiracy between the CIA and the Columbians, intending to undermine the government so they can take power for themselves.

Or you think its coincidence no one had ever hear d of global warming until after the CIA was formed? Or you expect us to believe that burning fossil fuels can actually warm the planet?

Tinfoil salesman|7.18.07 @ 5:57PM|#

Note: I'm not saying that the CIA is really behind global warming...I am raising the question. It seems like we could at least have an independent investigation...

Mahmoud Ahmed|7.18.07 @ 5:59PM|#

Jne,

It doesn't matter were the Boeing 757 is. The fact is planes flew into the wtc, we all saw it.

Someone IS behind it all. And while everyone is arguing over details over what happened, we are all ignoring that the FBI confirmed that Mahmoud Ahmed funded the highjackers. And the U.S. supported, associated with, was doing business with, and during the attacks was eating breakfast with Mahmoud Ahmed.

|7.18.07 @ 6:00PM|#

I've found a strong correlation between the Designated Hitter rule and global warming.

|7.18.07 @ 6:09PM|#

That nobody is even arguing the notion that a false flag attack would benefit the Bush administration and it's goals, make it's clear who benefits from domestic terrorism.

Anonymous|7.18.07 @ 6:11PM|#

Here's an interesting article, speaking of conspiracies.

BOOK REVIEW:

SAN FRANCISCO - When it comes to spy novels and Middle East intrigue, after 16 spell-binding years, the gripping story behind the Middle East quagmire - its issues of nuclear weapons and the quest for a Palestinian State - is finally being told in a ground-breaking new book entitled, THE PALESTINE CONSPIRACY.

Author Robert Spirko created the work in such a way that every reader in the world would understand all the intricate issues in the Middle East and how close the region actually came to the brink of nuclear Armageddon. THE PALESTINE CONSPIRACY, a genre spy-thriller by Robert Spirko, was fourth on the best-seller list at Atlasbooks, Inc., a national book distributor. Ingram Books is the worldwide distributor.

Mr. Spirko has a unique way of holding the reader in his grasp as the plot of THE PALESTINE CONSPIRACY unfolds. He literally takes you from your armchair and immerses you into the lifestyle of the Bedouin, the Israeli, the PLO and the mindset of the Middle-Easterner.

THE PALESTINE CONSPIRACY is not just another spy-novel; it is the quintessential spy-thriller because it forces the reader to understand how both sides "think" and why that thinking ultimately led to repeated wars in the Middle East.

Spirko, a financial and geo-political analyst, turned his attention to the Middle East in 1987, after discovering several common elements related to the Middle East question. In working for peace, and after several frustrating years, he put down his analysis in writing and when he was finished, he not only had a solution to the quagmire, he had a story to tell.

But, nobody was listening.

Today, all that has changed, thanks to Olive Grove Publishers who decided to give his book a chance.

When the Palestinian question came to a festering crisis in 1990, he had already predicted several of the actual events before they occurred. For instance, Spirko predicted the Intifada and Persian Gulf War, missing the actual invasion date of Kuwait by only one week. He did this through spectacular supposition, analysis and prediction based on what he was "seeing" in the region.

When Spirko typed his manuscript, he set the work to fiction, about what he thought might occur soon in the Middle East involving weapons of mass destruction, nuclear proliferation, the Palestinian uprising before it occurred, and how the Palestinian question begged to be answered, little did he realize that every event he described in the book would eventually transpire.

His story of what was really happening behind the scenes in the Middle East is truly astounding and remarkable, and his contribution to the Camp David Peace Talks in 2000, formulated a solution to the Jerusalem question. When the BBC got wind of it, they termed it "as nothing short of brilliant" - Jerusalem becoming the simultaneous capitals of both Israel and Palestine in congruous or concentric zones.

Spirko originally copyrighted his book on October 20, 1987, in the U. S.
Library of Congress where intelligence agencies reviewed his work.

Today, finally, somebody is listening.

Spirko feels that both sides must return to the Camp David Peace Talks and resume where they left off and "freeze in place" the already-agreed-upon negotiating points.

"It's like a marriage where both spouses storm away mad in an argument.
They don't divorce and then try to resume their relationship, they come back together, settle their differences, and resume their marriage. It must be the same for the Middle East Peace talks," Spirko says.

The story begins in Beirut, Lebanon, once a great financial capital of the Middle East, which lay in ruin, having been systematically blasted to rubble during 20 years of inexhaustible civil war and siege by Israel, the PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah and Lebanese factions. Soon, the quest for a Palestinian State would be framed by these events; namely, the invasion of Kuwait by a neighboring rogue state, Iraq, with Saddam Hussein's goal of seeking nuclear parity with Israel.

In Mr. Spirko's story, Rick Waite, a forgotten UPI correspondent, and Adrienne Waters, a Pulitzer Prize journalist from the London Times, meet-up in Beirut with a PLO operative named Ahmed, who discovers a secret intelligence memo about a secret plan to destroy Israel.

In the ensuing chase to find the answer to this secret communiqué and what it means, a deadly race against time begins as the unlikely trio tries to halt the launch of a secret weapon from a hidden PLO base camp in the Syrian Desert. U. S. and British intelligence operatives have their own agenda, and attempt to stop whatever is going on to save the entire region from a nuclear holocaust.

Spirko weaves a tale of chilling duplicity and thrilling action, as the characters evade and devise a method to announce the discovery of nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles to the rest of the world - all while United Nations' delegates bicker endlessly.

An executive at BookMasters, Inc., says, "The book is absolutely stunning in the manner in which Mr. Spirko, tells his tale. He is truly a master as an analyst, and it's totally unlike anything else we've ever read in a spy-thriller. It keeps you turning pages and won't let you quit - until the very end. And, what an ending it is! If you crave twisting plots, thrilling spy-action and intriguing characters, then this is the book for you."

Spirko, whose own background includes a stint in the U. S. Air Force and has given his advice to the National Security Council in Washington, D. C., has a degree in journalism and knows first-hand about the newsroom and what it takes to be an intelligence field agent. His knowledge of the trade makes the story real, daunting, and strikingly similar to "The Year of Living Dangerously."

"THE PALESTINE CONSPIRACY drips with reality," quips a book reviewer from Olive Grove Publishers. "If books were rated by Siskel & Roeper, it would be given a two-thumbs up."

Not since, Casablanca, do characters as earthy as Rick Waite, or as beautifully mysterious as London Times reporter, Adrienne Waters, or as desperate as PLO operative, Ahmed, bring fresh characters to a story that will be remembered by readers for a long time.

The novel is a mass market paperback produced by Olive Grove Publishers, and can be purchased at area bookstores through Ingram Book Group, New Leaf Distribution, and Baker and Taylor, priced at $14.99, ISBN 0-9752508-0-9. THE PALESTINE CONSPIRACY can also be ordered on the web at www.atlasbooks.com, or email orders from: order@bookmasters.com, or from Barnes & Nobles, Border's, Dalton's, efollett.com & Follett bookstores at colleges and universities, WaldenBooks, Amazon.com, Walmart.com, Target.com and other popular retail bookstores. Or, readers and store managers can call 1-800-BOOKLOG, or 800-247-6553 direct, to order.

For readers who want to know what was really going on in the Middle East prior to the Persian Gulf War, Sept. 11th, and Iraq War, THE PALESTINE CONSPIRACY, is a must read.

Paul|7.18.07 @ 6:18PM|#

make it's clear who benefits from domestic terrorism.

The Tacoma Police department does. Let's just keep it on the down-low that 99% of the use of the patrol boat is to bust pleasure boaters with alcohol on board.

Read the following with a straight face... dare ya:

"This is a great day for Tacoma," said, Tacoma Police Department Chief Don Ramsdell. "For the first time in Tacoma's history, we'll have a police presence on Tacoma's waterways. With the heightened security since 9/11, this will provide the citizens of Tacoma and the Port of Tacoma with the additional police protection on the waters around the city's edge."

|7.18.07 @ 6:30PM|#

But the Tacoma Police department wasn't eating breakfast with 9/11 hijacker financier Mahmoud Ahmed during the attacks.

edna|7.18.07 @ 6:34PM|#

does spirko pay for that ad? god, that book sounds awful.

and when, oh, when will the 9/11 conspiracy theory exposed on south park get some serious discussion here?!?

Paul|7.18.07 @ 6:39PM|#

But the Tacoma Police department wasn't eating breakfast with 9/11 hijacker financier Mahmoud Ahmed during the attacks.

So you say...

?|7.18.07 @ 6:51PM|#

While Bush was? :-D

|7.18.07 @ 7:00PM|#

Representative Porter Goss was eating breakfast with 9/11 hijacker fancier Mahmoud Ahmed. Then he was selected by Bush to head the investigation on what u.s. intelligence knew before the attacks, and after he announced himself and Bush innocent, he was promoted to director of the CIA.

|7.18.07 @ 7:01PM|#

If someone would come up with a 9/11 Osama link half that strong, the entire 911 truth movement would shut up.

Darwin\'s goldfish|7.18.07 @ 7:09PM|#

Milosevic tried to project a connection* between Kossovar Albanians and Al Qaeda too, you know. Perhaps 9/11 conspiracists might want to conjure up a parallel Kossovo bombing-9/11 connection, seeing how the current theories are not exactly holding up to scrutiny? "What if" parallel universe theorizing makes for great fun!

* Apparently, Al Qaeda operatives had visited Albania and made all sorts of monetary promises on which they did not deliver. I suppose because they found out that even amongst the most virulent "Great Albania" fanatic nationalists, religion was a non-factor, as Albanians are mostly secular-minded.

|7.18.07 @ 8:09PM|#

Except they did NOT fall at free-fall speeds.

They also didn't collapse "into their own footprints".

Six-hundred-plus foot long sections of the outer frame fell outward causing substantial damage to surrounding buildings, including WTC 7.

thoreau|7.18.07 @ 8:12PM|#

Six-hundred-plus foot long sections of the outer frame fell outward causing substantial damage to surrounding buildings, including WTC 7

Ooh, you just invoked the magical name of WTC7. Now you shall surely summon the Truther trolls to even greater frenzies!

Mahmoud Ahmed|7.18.07 @ 8:29PM|#

But I love that the "trolls" are deflecting attention away from my guilt, the U.S. Government support of me, and their continued protection of me from prosecution.

"Trolls" discussing demolition theories and their cohorts with imaginative connections to a Bin Laden conspiracy help me get away with mass murder.

dj|7.18.07 @ 10:29PM|#

So, the real reason for the troop surge
is to gear up for a 'hit & run' on Iran!

|7.19.07 @ 12:23AM|#

With some exceptions, these posts are a wasteland for rational thought. No doubt the kookiest posters will be the ones who think their contributions are the exception rather than the rule.

Why would a bona fide libertarian ever embrace a 911 conspiracy theory? They wouldn't. For, if they did there is a small chance they'd be forced to ask the question: "How do I respond?" "How do I act in light of what I know?" Annnnnd we know how it is with libertarians and action: They're much better at beating a horse to death with words than doing something profound. Beyond all of the rhetoric they're unlikely to risk insult or injury for stepping out for what they believe. Denial is a much safer choice.

Hell, isn't that why after decades of libertarian political thought being spewed forth in places like Reason Magazine, nothing of substance has been accomplished. In fact our culture hasn't been the least bit impacted by libertarian ideas. We continue to march toward a fully developed welfare state. All the while, libertarians sit around and fawn over themselves, juxtaposing one whacky opinion against the next; confusing activity with accomplishment.

Don't believe in False Flags?? How about the USS Liberty or the Gulf of Tonkin. Both incidents are factually proven to have involved the top leaders of our government--up to their eyeballs. The latter, being the False Flag that led to a decade long war and 60 thousand dead Americans.

And as for 911 how many of you pseudo scientists could park a Boeing 757 in your two car garage? Unless Houdini or David Copperfield posts here, it is unlikely the rest of you could accomplish such an illusion. That's the story your government has convinced you to believe: A box cutter weilding IslamoMuslimofaciastradicalArabterrorist who couldn't even pilot a single engine Cessna, flew a Boeing 757 with fighter pilot precision at speeds of 500 mph through a 16 foot wide hole into the interior of the Pentagon. Now who needs the tin foil?

Paul|7.19.07 @ 1:16AM|#

Now who needs the tin foil?

You don't, because there's plenty wrapped around your head.

|7.19.07 @ 1:42AM|#

Michael C. Moynihan:

...to wacky false-flag theories

How anti-intellectual and in ill service to the cause of liberty is the knee jerk dismissal of conspiracy theories and the assumption that all false-flag theories are "wacky". Government and its supporters engage in conspiracy and deception all the time. For example; examine the augments put forth for the Iraq war by the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans. Many of the WMD and terror connection contentions have been shown to be premeditated fabrications. We should be very watchful of our government undertaking a false flag terror operation against us to justify an attack on Iran. The evidence is that governments pull this kind of stuff with depressing frequency.

...9/11 shields Bush from accountability,

That is certainly true and our liberty is in danger because of it. There is nothing in the provided refutation link that challenge that grave political truth.

|7.19.07 @ 2:01AM|#

On 9/11:

I think that one possible scenario is that the government wasn't involved in facilitating the attack, but that they are being dishonest with us about certain aspects.

The accumulated evidence that the Israeli government had prior knowledge of the attacks and didn't tell us (not that they were involved in the facilitation of the attacks) is now pretty overwhelming.

BTW, what about that building that just got hit with one engine or something but still seemed to fall so uniformly? It was the one that the owner was quoted as saying, "we decided to pull it". Does the provided link address that building? Does anyone know of a good refutation to the idea that that building was actually brought down with explosives? That was the one that I've always wondered about.

|7.19.07 @ 2:08AM|#

Paul Craig Roberts,

Those of us who love liberty thank you for your many contributions throughout your career.

edna|7.19.07 @ 8:34AM|#

"The accumulated evidence that the Israeli government had prior knowledge of the attacks and didn't tell us (not that they were involved in the facilitation of the attacks) is now pretty overwhelming."

of course. it's the joos again.

|7.19.07 @ 11:29AM|#

Rick, what you're referring to is WTC 7. Read my post above.

And what was "pulled" was the firefighting and search operation when it became apparent that the building would collapse. The firefighters were in danger and were moved to safety.

|7.19.07 @ 12:02PM|#

of course. it's the joos again.

Only for those with racist predilections.

|7.19.07 @ 12:09PM|#

Isaac,

Thanks, I'll read your post. Do you know if "pull it" is also actually lingo for "take the building down", as has been claimed?

|7.19.07 @ 1:51PM|#

Except they did NOT fall at free-fall speeds.

They also didn't collapse "into their own footprints".

Yes, of course. But this is such a tiny blog, with not nearly enough room to answer every inane claim by the Nutters.

But I will answer one: about the 16 foot hole Skip mentioned. That was the exit hole. If Skip thinks a 757 passing through three rings of military grade reinforced concrete at 500 MPH will retain enough structural integrity to punch a 100+ foot exit hole, then he's dumber than that Reynold's Wrap Hat makes him look.

|7.19.07 @ 2:22PM|#

Rick,

I really don't know, sorry. I've only ever been involved in putting buildings up. Never taking them down.

I really do have a hard time believing that after taking down two buildings* (an act that traumatized a city, terrified a nation, shocked the world and killed a whole bunch of people) they would have waited eight or nine hours to "pull it" on a third. And then just claim that that collapse was just a side effect of the first two.

*whether by airplanes or controlled charges; whether arab terrorists or clandestine American agents.

You'd think a government that could pull shit like this off would have been able to find some "WMDs" in Iraq and not had a bunch of hillbilly prison guards exposed for abusing prisoners.

Scooby|7.19.07 @ 2:48PM|#

adding to what Brandybuck said:

...and the 16-ft hole wasn't necessarily the target. Saying they hit the Pentagon with the precision to hit a 16-ft target is like drawing the target around a bullet hole that's already been shot in the broad side of a barn and claiming a bullseye. The Pentagon is 5 stories (77 ft) high and over 920 feet long on a side. The plane didn't even hit this generously sized target directly; it skipped off of the ground outside. It doesn't take a Blue Angels pilot to fall short of a target that's almost 2 acres in area.

Also, neither USS Liberty and Gulf of Tonkin are examples of "false flag" operations. In the former, the US blew it off because it was our ally (the JOOS) did it- the US didn't blame it on the Egyptians and use it as a pretext to jump into the Six Day War (i.e., real attack by ally, but not blamed on anyone else as a pretext to justify "retribution"). In the latter, the US exagerated the facts of one minor incident with the North Vietnamese and probably made up a second incident as a pretext to ramp up our involvment in a civil war (lies, but not "false flag")- the US didn't stage a real attack using its forces or those of an ally (which would be a 'false flag' operation).

|7.19.07 @ 3:15PM|#

Trying to dissuade Truthers from their delusions is futile. They've made up their mind and no amount of facts will make them question their "Truth".

However, there are a lot of people asking questions, because there are a lot of questions to be asked. These people will naturally graviate towards the Truthers, and I want them to learn early what the reality is. I want to vaccinate against the Truther Virus. Because there's nothing sadder than an otherwise intelligent person spooping their brains out with a conspiracist spoon.

|7.19.07 @ 5:07PM|#

Brandybuck,

That's because proponents of the Bin Laden conspiracy theory make their case with name calling, and a refusal to deal with the facts in an honest way... such tactics are of course futile.

*Any* hard evidence you tin-foil loonies are using to link Bin Laden to 9/11 and justify such a conspiracy theory would do. But such evidence is not forth coming because it's from the same imaginary glue you use to link yourself to intellectual high ground on the matter.

India intelligence and the FBI confirmed Mahmoud Ahmed funded the 9/11 terrorists - and people who admitted involvement said they were supported by him as well. Care to link Bin Laden as well? No? Rather invent some magical bullshit to maintain your position instead? Thought so.

Further, the links between members in our government and Mahmoud Ahmed are strong - starting with the fact that knowing Mahmoud Ahmed ran the operation, they did nothing to him and instead went into Afghanistan to build pre-planned oil pipelines that the Taliban were blocking. Oh, and not find a guy strapped to a dialysis machine.

The inability for people, blinded by 'truth', to see new truths is so strong that 200 years from now people will still claim the world is flat, and a man in a cave pulled off the crime of the century to give the Bush administration the political position to do exactly what it desperately wanted to do, and already planned to do.

|7.19.07 @ 7:23PM|#

Annnnnd we know how it is with libertarians and action: They're much better at beating a horse to death with words than doing something profound. Beyond all of the rhetoric they're unlikely to risk insult or injury for stepping out for what they believe.

I always felt the same way about Truthers. With no exceptions of which I am aware, none of them behaves the way I think somebody who deeply believes their government has sponsored or committed terrorism against its own people ought to. I don't think it's a stretch to say somebody who believes this should be organizing and gearing up to overthrow the government, violently if necessary. It would be just, wouldn't it? It would certainly be "profound."

So my question to Steven Young et al is, why aren't you?

Moreover, preference for the path of least resistance is not a uniquely libertarian trait. I daresay it's in our nature.

|7.19.07 @ 11:05PM|#

Issac:

You'd think a government that could pull shit like this off would have been able to "find" (quotation marks mine) some "WMDs" in Iraq and not had a bunch of hillbilly prison guards exposed for abusing prisoners.

I don't know; even if there are flashes of brilliance, inefficiency is what's usual for the government (we're probably freer cuz of it.) Still, I'm less suspicious about WTC 7 now. Thanks.

|7.19.07 @ 11:39PM|#

"Mahmoud Ahmed",

Let's see some more evidence for your claims about Mahmoud Ahmed. Who else makes these clams besides the NNDB? Where did the NNDB get their information?

Skeptics,

Do you have anything to say about this in the way of refutation?

|7.19.07 @ 11:49PM|#

Paul, Scooby and the Bradybunch:

First the 16 foot hole to which I refer, was not just the exit hole, it was size of the entry hole as well--before the exterior of the building collapsed. Do your homework, you can't have it both ways. If you claim the exit hole was 16 ft. in diameter (which the photos show it to be), how does a 60 ton airplane traveling at 500 MPH make and entry hole 16 ft. in diameter, travel through 9 feet of steel reinforced concrete, destroy multiple steel reinforced concrete columns and on the way out punch a perfectly round 16 foot wide exit hole? The nose of a 757 is mostly carbon fiber. Who in their right mind believes an aluminum aircraft (which your government has told you vaporized on impact) could do such a neat job. Your position is foolish and indefensible. To maintain your comfort level, you shoot the messenger because you fear his message.

I am proud of my tin hat...it's protecting a large quantity of gray matter beneath it. You three need no protection at all.

The truth|7.20.07 @ 1:01PM|#

One through nine, no maybes, no supposes, no fractions. You can't travel in space, you can't go out into space, you know, without, like, you know, uh, with fractions - what are you going to land on - one-quarter, three-eighths? What are you going to do when you go from here to Venus or something? That's dialectic physics.

Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices:

advertisements