Submitted by Pachamama
We vow never to be constrained by narratives which suggest that the official version alone is to be truth. Similarly, we have never been particularly interested in the past or even the present beyond the extent to which they are helpful in sharpening our vision of the future. It is foreseeing events which should occupy our minds, and acting to influence what we see coming. We care not, particularly, in being right at any time. For us, the imagining or re-imagining are most important.
In this article we are going to posit that actors within the United States intelligence community have plotted global terror attacks as a means of driving Donald Trump into the presidency. This seems the most likely path to victory for him. And we have seen a stream of ‘terrorist attacks’ in the USA and Europe – in France especially. We are seeking to put meaning to what appears, on the surface, as random acts of violence. Seemingly, lacking structure, enduring purpose, a return address.
Given that the military-intelligence-industrial-complex has never been monolithic and that fissures are always likely to emerge, like the Smedley Butler incident of the 1940’s. However, three recent events suggest terrorist plots by supporters of Trump. Firstly, when we read the madness of a military strategy of a would-be vice presidential candidate, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, we were amazed at its emptiness, its lack of ‘genius’. Secondly, we consider that knowing he is likely to lose, will not be running a conventional campaign, is not spending money on ads and so on. Thirdly, Trump seem more responsive to terrorists acts elsewhere and is prepared to jettison important events to benefit from his law and order stanza, like the announcement of a VP. In these circumstances, something as surprising as a ‘terrorist attack’ on the ‘home front’ beyond the caliber of recent, minor incidents might serve to scare a gullible public into believing that the Stormtroopers or the brown shirts of Trump should be in the streets.
Reports suggest that up to 84 people could have been killed in the most recent of these events on Bastille Day in the port/resort Mediterranean city of Nice. And the American government has a rich history of conducting terrorist attacks in Europe under Operation Gladio, for example. Under that war of terror, the CIA carried out many bombings in European cities to achieve several objectives. These included the demonization of communists and other left leaning political parties and social movements; the prevention of leftist European governments from joining the Communist Bloc. So by attributing those actions to their political enemies, acted to confuse the populations and destroyed the electoral chances of parties which questioned capitalism. Of course, there were other elements, as well. Those were to include certain separatist movements like the Red Brigades and so on. All this information was verified under a series of FOIA filings from government archives.
The modern lexicon of modern election rigging in almost completely American. American presidential candidates are well known to be prepared to go to any all extremes to make sure that they will cease power by fair or foul means. And we have countless examples of this and their consequences.
Richard Nixon went to his death believing that the father of JFK and his friends in the Mafia rigged the 1960 presidential election which delivered a narrow 500,000 vote margin of victory to his son, John Kennedy. And based on the recent work of William Pepper it was the same organized criminal institution, the Mafia, allied with a cabal of government forces; the FBI director, former CIA – the Dulles brothers; top business and military interests and Bay of Pigs terrorists that would come together to assassinate JFK. And more importantly, be able to conduct an official cover up.
In 1979 the Islamic Republic of Iran remove the United States imposed Shah. The Shah was himself installed by the Americans and the British by their successful plot in removing a duly elected Mohammad Mossadeq, an Iranian nationalist who seemed to believe that his country’s oil did not belong to British Protroleum as the oil company claimed.
As a consequence of that revolution the US embassy was ceased by students and a number of Americans were held hostage for nearly a year. The Carter administration had hope the release of the hostages would have help his re-election over his opponent, Ronald Reagan. But the Reagan campaign when to work to deny this foreign policy victory to Carter. For Carter, this was his best chance of defeating Reagan.
They sent George Bush senior, a man who we now know had played a leading role in the assassination of JFK, to the Iranians and he made a secret deal that if the release of the hostages were to be delayed until after the November 1979 election, and that Raegan won, that the new administration will supply the Iranians with armaments to fight the war with the Iraqis. And America went on to supply arms to both sides in what turned out to be a bloody 7-year conflict. That intervention also gave us the Iran-Contra scandal which rocked the Raegan administration and caused a televised apology from Raegan. In the Iran-Contra drugs were brought into the USA by the CIA and sold within African-American communities. The proceeds from which were used to buy arms to supply to the Iranians as US law/sanctions made a direct transaction illegal.
We are fairly confident that in all presidential elections these kinds of shenanigans take place. In the case of the 2000 election it took the interference of the supreme court to deliver the election to Bush, the younger, and we will all remember the electoral tricks in Florida and elsewhere.
For the 2012 election there was some indications that actors working on behalf of the Romney camp might have made at least two illegal efforts to influence the results. Firstly, there is some evidence that the Benghazi attack of the US embassy could have been the handiwork of pro-Romney elements in the intelligence agencies seeking to create a surprise that would influence outcomes. Secondly, Anonymous, the hacking group, had indicated at the time that Carl Rove and his ‘technicians’ had made repeated efforts to electronically flip the results in Romney’s favour ala George Bush in Florida. They suggested that they, Anonymous, had electronically prevented multiple attempts to alter the result. So Carl Rove was left preventing the networks from calling the race for Obama. They finally made that call much later than usual and Romney leaving his concession speech until his technicians finally gave up.
Of course, Daesh or ISIS or myriad of outfits currently operating in Syria, Iraq or Libya could be given attribution any attack, anywhere. This is a particularly difficult time for these partners of the West. The Americans seem to be conceding to the Syria-Iran-Russia-China coalition which has escalated the destruction of then of thousands of western-supported terrorists. Those forces have regained larger and larger soothes of Syrian territory from the terrorists. Their main supply routes through Turkey are being cut off, both by the Turkish government, they once primary backers, and the Syrian led forces on the other side. These emerging political equations could see the complete slaughter of all remaining ‘terrorist’ in the near future.
These conditions, on the ground, also provide ample opportunities for the kinds of bombings, in the USA, that we saw in Turkey recently. As if to send a message to their sponsors that support can never cease. We’ve seen these same western-supported terrorists bombing the centre for global terror, Saudi Arabia itself, as well. Also in the past few weeks. This same mindset has been prepared, over decades, to be directed in ways which could interfere with the process of electioneering in the USA. And that incident/s may very well come in the envelope known in American politics as the period to best serve Trump’s interests, as probable underdog. Not allowing his opponent enough time to respond, while blaming the Obama administration and Clinton, herself, for being weak on defense. For allowing the ‘terrorists’ to attacks Americans at home.