(Canadian) Election will raise threat of terror attack - canada.com

http://www.canada.com/calgary/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=8beb0edb-65a2-4252-85ae-33ec1161eacd

The threat of a major terrorist attack on Canadian soil could increase dramatically when Prime Minister Paul Martin calls a federal election, a former CIA director warned Sunday. An election call could come as early as next month.

James Woolsey said Sunday that the March 11 Madrid bombings may have sent a message that makes an election campaign a dangerous season.
"The severity of the threat of a major terrorist attack in Canada may depend on how close you are to an election," Woolsey said in Calgary Sunday morning, following the taping of a panel discussion on the topic the Global Sunday national current affairs TV program.

"What al-Qaeda learned from Spain is that an election is a good time to blow people up," said Woolsey, who was head of the CIA from 1993 to 1995. He said if Spain withdraws its troops from Iraq -- as newly elected Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero has said will happen -- "there's no other word for it than appeasement."

-OK, folks, I need your theories on why the CIA is concerned about a Canadian election.

I really hope nothing happens, and I believe we won't be a target for an Al Qaeda attack... However there are likely others that might attempt such a thing.

We're really not enough of a target or threat to them. We simply don't matter enough.

Of greater concern, Bell said, is Canada's complacency on the issue.

"Neither the politicians nor the public have really realized that we're at war right now against the terrorists," he said.

-Come on, Canada, I'm just not seeing enough fear here. I want to see some terra!

-OK, folks, I need your theories on why the CIA is concerned about a Canadian election.

Because this is being spun by CanWest Global, the closest thing Canada has to Faux News.

Did they even stop to work out their own stupid hypothesis? Supposedly, al-Qaida hit Madrid because Spain supported the Iraq invasion. Canada most emphatically did not.

Just another small way to set the stage for whatever shenanigans happen down here in November.

I wonder what the objective is, other than merely to spread fear, which might sell the Neo-con product.

Call me a tinfoiler, people, but I've talked about this before. I see it coming.

If something blows up during the Canadian election, don't anyone try telling me it's anything but a black bag job, courtesy of Mr Woolsey's friends.

The Canadian neocons would get a big bounce, I expect, from a terror strike. Conceivably, it's the only way they could form a government. And support for the resurgent left would, I expect, collapse.

And Bush gets a bounce too - after all, we're almost Americans - but doesn't shoulder the burden of not having prevented it.

Fear Fear Fear.

I was just going to post the following when I saw your post.

If a "terrorist" bomb attack went off tomorrow in Canada I would think it was actually just as likely to be a false flag operation than an actual terrorist attack. I could easily see the PNAC Mofos doing something like this in order to make Canadians more receptive to the implementation of police state type policies here in Canada. The US had their "Pearl Harbor" event, and results for the most part were pretty much as the PNACers desired. Does anyone think Canadians as a whole would react much differently if a major Canadian city or piece of infrastructure like a subway, a bridge, or a prominent building was hit with a bomb attack and we were assured it was all the work of the Al Quaida evil-doers?

I think we would be much more likely to be swayed into the US camp than Spain was because of our close proximity to the US and our already closely intertwined military and trading relationships. I am sure a very large proportion of Canadians would think our only option would be to cuddle up even closer to the US and implement whatever police state policies the anti-terrorism experts proclaim to be necessary. So if there is a terrorist attack, when attempting to analyze who might be responsible, don't just accept whatever propaganda comes over the 6 o'clock news. Remember to ask yourself when all is said and done, cui bono (who profits)?

Follow these jerks !!!!

Tell every Canadian to bring a camera ever place they go.
Catch everything on film!!!!

... being able to "protect" us. They didn't buy the Saddam-9/11 thing despite being deluged with US media! We are already in Afghanistan and the War on Terror (and we know that we were featured on bin Laden's hit list even though Bush didn't make a big fuss about us being a valued ally).

I suppose some folks might think, "we've got to suck up to the US or worse things will happen" -- but my hunch is that if there's an attack, a significant number of Canadians might think, "The US let this happen on purpose, and we didn't deserve that". Apologizing abjectly for something that a majority of the country endorsed (not following Bush into Iraq) doesn't seem likely. I was reading the coverage in the Globe and Mail of the goodwill hockey game -- the kids from that town near Boston, whose bus was surrounded by angry protesters in Montreal last year, were invited to New Brunswick. I noticed that people weren't saying "we're sorry we didn't obey Bush" -- they were apologizing for frightening the children. Even the premier said that it wasn't the kids' decision to invade Iraq and that they should not be punished .... clearly he felt that there was plenty of room to disagree with the US there.

than from Al Qaeda, IMHO.

I hope we delay our election until the fall, so we can determine which leader (Martin or Harper) is doing the most to suck up to Bush.

In the case of a terror attack in Canada, I'm sure there would be some Canadians (like the Canadian DUers and other lefties) who would question if it was a "false flag" operation (or perhaps another LIHOP deal) on the part of the PNACers designed to make Canadian public opinion more receptive to having a closer integration between the Canadian and US military and security forces.

I'd venture to say you will not see a word of this discussed in any mainstream news media at all, but you would see a constant stream of "Terra, Terra, Terra" headlines and news stories and talking heads from right wing/neo con think tanks assuring us that this is what we get for being "soft on terrorism" and issuing ominous warnings that the fanatical Muslim hordes are just itching to take over the world for Mohammed and make us all into Muslims whether we want to be or not. I could see a majority of Canadians, who still rely on mainstream media for their news and whose jobs could very well be dependent on US markets remaining open to Canadian products, would feel we have no option but to submit to US demands on us for a closer security relationship, even if they do question the US motives and question what part US foreign policy has played in getting us into this mess.

I think Mylroie told him to say this shit. And yes, that's what it is: shit. The neocons are so pissed that Canadians aren't trembling in fear becuase we're too close to the States. If Americans look at the northern neighbours and see our stunning lack of paranoia, maybe they'll start to think it normal. That is certainly against the neocon ideal.

So many of us have envisioned a terror related event close to the election to galvanize a rightward swing in the electorate.

Maybe just the threat of it will do the trick?

I mean what elese has BushCo got left to use?

.
.
.

That I will blame . .

and that's the one south of us.

My greatest fears are from the country south of us,

None other.

Oh for heavens sake man cannot you separate the government from the people? Do you think people who would know better would blame Iraqi's for Saddam (mostly a CIA deal there). My guess your biggest fear should be a large under the radar migration from below in attempted escape from a place being managed like a gulag

On edit, I was really trying to sarcastic, but it didn't seem to read that way. Maybe I should just go watch




EXCELLANT COMEDY, ONE OF CANDY'S BEST!, March 17, 2001
Reviewer: Carolina Megiel (see more about me) from California USA
In this satire on the Cold War mentality, the President of the United States and an arms manufacturer find it in their best economic interests to plant rumors of a potential nuclear attack--by our neighbors in Canada! Then, following a cross-border incident at a hockey tournament, a patriotic sheriff, Bud B. Boomer, and his deputy, Honey , and suicidal friend, Roy Boy, plan a counter-offensive... with hilarious results. John Candy plays Bud Boomer, a Niagara County, N.Y., sheriff who spends much of his day fishing for laid-off, suicidal defense-plant workers at the foot of the Niagra falls. His sidekick, Honey (Rhea Perlman), is psychotic; his buddies Roy Boy and Kabral (Kevin J. O'Connor and Bill Nunn) are thickheaded and unemployed. The plant, owned by R.J. Hacker (G.D. Spradlin), has become the victim of the pro-peace policies of a President (Alan Alda) whose approval ratings are on a slide; he needs a war in order to give people jobs and keep his own. With most of the world's major villains dead or imprisoned, the President's oily national security adviser, Stu Smiley (Kevin Pollack)--who is also in Hacker's pocket--suggests Canada. The smear campaign is under way. This movie is a perfect example of how great character casting can be the movie all in its self. In my opinion all the characters were cast greatly. Their terrific acting only added to an already hilarious movie. The acting in itself was also excellent, very believable and in no way were the actors simply 'reading the lines'. John Candy added great humor to this movie as his portrayal of Bud Boomer. The acting of the supporting roles was no less impressive
(snip)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000059TG8/103-8054040-4074218?v=glance

If it's spun as "terrorists strike during elections," might that be used as a reason for the US to go to Terror Level Red during our election? :tinfoilhat:

Tucker

A nice little background prop to point voters in the direction of Bush.

Somebody just asked her if they were investigating the ultra-right for the terrorist bombings.

Regarding the article, it's nauseating enough that neo-liberals spin U.S. events, much less the whole freaking world. I am so sick of hearing this appeasement crap. The only one who has appeased the terrorists is George W. Bush.

I don't even know what terror level red entails. Now I am curious. I guess it means police state.

I saw the q&a with Palacio too.

Whoever did the bombing in Spain, they have certainly succeeded in a "strategy of tension," since every right winger has used that event and the election to try to insinuate that a vote for anyone other than a Bush is appeasement.

...this reminds me of Bush, back when he was trying to lie us into the Iraq invasion, saying that he thought that anyone who opposed him was guilty of treason.

what I also wonder about is the "home grown terrorists" in America who are being ignored, as far as I can tell, by our govt, and most certainly by our media (because they have to keep the fervor up for the ongoing occupation, etc.).

Remember, there have been two chemical weapons caches uncovered belonging to right wing groups in the U.S...one recently in Texas, the other more than a year ago in Washington State...a guy and his wife trying to sell stuff to a guy affliated with the KKK in, I think, North Carolina.

I also know there have been rumors and speculation about McVeigh's possible association with/training with terrorists in the Phillippines.

And, dont' forget the anthrax attacks after 9-11, which, from all available info, seem to have come from someone with access to our weaponized anthrax, and who would have had to have top security clearance...

The Bush crew has been so secretive, while, at the same time, using the threat of terrorism for everything...a mid-term election, to scare Americans into an invasion of Iraq...and people in this administration were complicit in all sorts of dirty ops in the 80s..which doesn't give me lots of faith in them..

anyway, here's the article.

http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=294892004
Sun 14 Mar 2004
In August 1980, a bomb went off at Bologna station, killing 84 passengers and wounding 200. It took undercover agents two years to discover that it was not, as most people suspected, the work of the left-wing Red Brigade, but of a right-wing group known as the Ordine Nuovo, or New Order, which had links across Europe and even into South America.
The lessons of those investigations could be critical today if the true identity of the group responsible for the Madrid massacre is ever to be established.
Ordine Nuovo, it was found, had developed a political theory which was a chilling foretaste of the terrorism of the 21st century. It came to be known as the ‘strategy of tension’ and its aim was to carry out acts of terrorism which could be blamed, not on right-wing extremists, but on radical left-wing groups. The idea was that by sending intelligence agencies off on a false trail, panic and confusion would be created, to the point where the army might have to step in to take control.
"In our view, the first move to destroy the structures of the democratic state under the cover of communist activities," read one of their papers.
There is an awful familiarity about that passage today. The immediate presumption in Spain was that ETA must have been responsible for the bombing of the Madrid trains. The explosives were of a type used by ETA, plans were unearthed linking ETA to attacks on trains, and a lorry containing bombs was traced back to ETA.
The evidence all pointed one way. Now, however, it seems that the trail may have been the wrong one, and police find themselves fighting on two fronts, just as they had to do in their war against the Black Orchestra.
That war was won in the end. It was won because the organisations responsible were finally penetrated, exposed and brought to justice. It took a generation to do it, and most of what happened is concealed so deep in intelligence files that some of it has never emerged to this day.

This sounds like Operation Northwoods took up residence in Italy, with the help of Kissinger and Scoop (mentor of the neocons) Jackson!!!

http://italy.indymedia.org/news/2004/01/473314.php?theme=3D1

GLADIO: THE SECRET U.S. WAR TO SUBVERT ITALIAN DEMOCRACY
by Arthur E. Rowse Saturday January 31, 2004

(Gladio, the article notes, means "double-edged sword)

ARTHUR E. ROWSE, FORMERLY ON THE STAFF OF THE WASHINGTON POST AND U.S. NEWS
& WORLD REPORT IS AVAILABLE FOR INTERVIEWS.

Although many European intelligence agencies have admitted participating,
the CIA has denied any connection with Gladio. But enough information has
emerged to show that the CIA sponsored and financed a large portion of the
terrorism and disruption that plagued Italy for nearly half a century...

THE STRATEGY OF TENSION

``The strategy of tension'' that emerged was designed to disrupt
normality with terror attacks in order to create chaos and provoke a
frightened public into accepting still more authoritarian government.


PLOTTING COUPS D'ETAT
Meanwhile, groups of right-wingers were busy planning more takeovers of the
elected government, with the active encouragement of U.S. officials. A
seminal document was the 1970 132-page order...``groups acting under U.S. Army intelligence control should be used to
launch violent or nonviolent actions according to the nature of the case.''

According to the Pike Report, the CIA disbursed $10 million to 21
candidates, mostly Christian Democrats. 41 That amount did not include
$800,000 that Ambassador Graham Martin, going around the CIA, obtained
through Henry Kissinger at the White House for General Miceli. 42 Miceli
would later face charges for the Borghese coup attempt but, fitting the
pattern, he was cleared.

...Perhaps the most shocking political crime of the 1970s was the kidnapping
and murder of Prime Minister Aldo Moro and five of his aides in 1978. The
abduction occurred as Moro was on his way to submit a plan to strengthen
Italian political stability by bringing communists into the government.
Earlier versions of the plan had sent U.S. officials into a tizzy. Four
years before his death, on a visit to the U.S. as foreign minister, Moro was
reportedly read the riot act by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and later
by an unnamed intelligence official. In testimony during the inquiry into
his murder, Moro's widow summed up their ominous words: ``You must abandon
your policy of bringing all the political forces in your country into direct
collaboration...or you will pay dearly for it.''

...Senator Henry Jackson (D-Wash.)issued a similar warning two years later in an interview in Italy.

http://www.constitution.org/ocbpt/ocbpt_14.htm

A Strategy of Tension

Like the Reischtag fire, the Oklahoma City bombing served as the catalyst to impose a new wave of draconian legislation on the American people...The bombing also dovetailed perfectly with the policy of blaming pre-arranged groups, developed in early 1980s by the CIA's Vince Cannistraro working in tandem with Oliver North to develop the policy that was used to divert attention onto Libya in the Lockerbie bombing.

The CIA had established a precedent for such policies more than forty years ago in Italy and Greece...The CIA helped create a "Strategy of Tension" in Italy through collaboration with the Mafia, corrupt Italian secret services, and fascists working through Masonic Mafia-linked societies such as Licio Gelli's Propaganda Due (P2 Lodge). Gelli (AKA: the "Puppet Master") had been friends with fascists such as Italian Dictator Benito Mussolini, Croatia's Dr Pavlic, and Juan Peron of Argentina, and had also fought with the fascist Italian Blackshirt division during the Spanish Civil War.

P2 — essentially a Right-wing parallel government, was aligned with a super-secret Italian organization called Il Gladio — set up in 1956 with the help of British Intelligence and the CIA...
This network was conceived by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, and organized by the NSC, which set up the Office of Policy Co-ordination to run it, staffed and funded by the CIA.

While the main focus of Gladio was to resist a potential Soviet invasion, its fascist roots and violent history indicate it has served mainly as a policy instrument to resist internal subversion — through terrorist means...The covert objectives of Gladio were to spread panic and unrest through the implementation of "terrorist outrages," and also to directly attack the Left in an attempt to provoke them into an armed response. The purpose of this strategy was to demonize the Left and isolate them from popular support, while providing an excuse to curtain civil liberties. As a 1969 memo from Aginter Press, a fascist front group, explained:

Our belief is that the first phase of political activity ought to be to create the conditions favouring the installation of chaos in all of the regime's structures. This should necessarily begin with the undermining of the state economy so as to arrive at confusion throughout the whole legal apparatus. This leads on to a situation of strong political tension, fear in the world of industry and hostility towards the government and the political parties.… In our view the first move we should make is to destroy the structure of the democratic state, under the cover of communist and pro-Chinese activities. Moreover, we have people who have infiltrated these groups and obviously we will have to tailor our actions to the ethos of the milieu — propaganda and action of a sort which will seem to have emanated from our communist adversaries and pressure brought to bear on people in whom power is invested at every level. That will create a feeling of hostility towards those who threaten the people of each and every nation, and at the same time we must raise up a defender of the citizenry against the disintegration brought about by terrorism and subversion.…<1298>

Interesting.

Only Bush is upset with Canada's lack of participation.
Bush is Canada's only enemy.

So why would Bush want to attack Canada????

To prove a point across the world that his Al Quiada will
do anything he wants them to do.

being used by Bushco as an excuse to have US troops sent into Canada to "help" Canada deal with the "terrorist" threat.

Paul Martin: "It's quite all right, George. We're on top of the situation and things under control, but thanks for your neighborly concern."

GeeDubya: "No, no Paul. Not at all. I insist. It's the least I can do for my favorite PM next to Tony and John Howard. In fact knowing how badly you'll need our help, I've already given the orders for our 10th Mountain Division boys in Fort Drum NY to head on over and give you Canuckistanians a helping hand. They'll be arriving in Ottawa any minute now.

Paul Martin: (With the thumpa, thumpa, thumpa sound of helicopters approaching in the background) Oh, Ok then, I think that's probably them outside right now.

GeeDubya: "Did I forget to mention We'll be sending up a few hundred special ops guys to Alberta? Dick tells me Alberta is important cause that's sorta like a colder version of Texas and it's where you Canuckistanians have all your oil fields. Dick says we gotta protect the oil fields, and pipelines, Paul, just like we did in Eeeraq."

Paul Martin: "Yeah, whatever."

James Woolsey. That's all you gotta say!

I watched a speech he gave in front of the chamber of commerce saying he was going to put through "reforms" come Hell or high water. I fiqure "reforms" is code for tax cuts and privatization.

.
.
.

So

I thought this might be an appropriate contribution . .



Is that "Junior" in the boat ??

Martin's reforms are to abolish the antiquated system of patronage in Canada. We need these reforms to root out cronyism in government, and bring honesty, integrity and fairness to our government. He's going out do it "come hell or high water', I applaud him for trying!

And the dangers are coming from Martin's stealth government. Now they are trying to ram Bill C-7 through the senate which is Canada's answer to Patriot II. They've attempted to get through a couple of times previously and it didn't make it. It looks like its going to make it this time what with everyone's attention being diverted to the scandals.

The following is from an email that was sent to me, if anyone wants the entire message which includes email addys of the senators and a form letter, contact me.

The Senate is holding hearings into Bill C-7 the latest piece of Canada's police state legislation. This bill is the third version of it that they have tried to pass over the last 2 years: it was C-42 then C-55 then C-17, now called C-7.

This bill is horrific: it gives unlimited power without parliamentary review to 8 different ministers in the form of interim orders, with an explicit exemption from the orders being examined for their legality or constitutionality. It gives these orders under the Quarantine Act, and provides National Defense with a reserve pool of military judges to prepare for the event of martial law, so it's truly frightening; all of us who have examined the bill feel it must be stopped by any means, although we recognize that stopping legislation in the Senate is rare and very difficult.

The bureaucrats have been testifying all week before the committee, and the questions from the Senators clearly showed that there are a number who are strongly and weakly opposed to it, as well as 2 strongly pushing it (Day and the Chair: Fraser). So that means that there is the possibility, albeit very slim, of stopping the legislation.

Unfortunately, some of the Senators who are the most opposed are not on the Transport committee (Andreuchuk, Beaudoin); the government stacked the deck by sending it to the Transport committee instead of Legal and Constitutional Affairs where it belongs, but would have a much rougher ride.

Canadians, please take urgent action to let the Senators know of your concerns: the committee meet Monday to hear the Ministers involved make their sales pitch. Some of the questions you should be looking for answers to include:

Why is the Senate considering giving 8 different Ministers the Executive power on their sole authority to issue Interim Orders in lieu of laws without first consulting Parliament, and exempts the Orders from being even examined in advance for their legality or constitutionality?

Why does the government want to establish a reserve pool of military judges in the event of martial law?

Why is the Senate considering reintroducing searches without warrant?

Can the Interim Orders under the Quarantine Act be used to order forced vaccinations and/or internment as in the US Homeland Security Act?

Why does the government want to remove the protections of the Privacy Act of their personal data collected by the government within Canada?

Why does the government want to give the personal data of Canadian travelers without any control on how the information will be used? If you are black-listed in the United States, will you be black-listed from flying in Canada? What can you do about it if you are?

What is the demonstrable need for Big Brother databases in a free and democratic society? Why does the USA get all the personal data of Canadians even when they are not flying to the US?

More links:
http://www.cba.org/CBA/News/2004_Releases/2004-03-18_antiterror.asp
http://www.caut.ca/english/bulletin/2004_mar/news/c7.asp
http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/Bills_ls.asp?Parl=37&Ses=3&ls=C7

He could invade Canada on the pretext of saving us, march into Alberta and take over the oilfields, pipelines, and tar sands. On his way through southern Alberta, he would pick up plenty of well wishers, including Klein.

OK, that's not really serious, but what the hey.

perhaps this is just more pressure to sign on to the continental missile defense system the US seems to think will solve all their problems..

more likely its just more of the same.. keep everyone terrified and they're a lot easier to push around..

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

I think the Flying Monkeys aided and abbetted by the former Alliance party are planning a Civil Union. ie. Alliance says: "We'll give you our oil and all the beaver you can handle if you can muster up a little fear before the next election."

As you may well know, the Liberals (in power) are not on speaking terms with the Flying Monkeys and 80% of Canadians would like to maintain that status. Of course if Kerry gets in .... we are a forgiving nation.

Until then -- Our beaver is off limits.

Bush co want to help get Harper elected. They are trying to influence our election. Harper pledged in the lobby of Parliament that he stands with Bush. He pledged this in OUR house, with a picture of THEIR (US) flag, against our government and the against the will of Canadians.
Since the scandal (that isn't even a scandal) broke, the neocons "think" they have some wind in their sails.
They actually plan on riding this all the way to the top. With no policy or platform that Canadians will accept, they see this as their opportunity to crown Harper PM. The Cons are positively foaming at the mouth for power right now. It's truly frightening!
The poll released on the weekend must have come as a huge shock to the crazy right-wingers. Despite all the bad Liberal press, Harper's coronation , and ALL the media manipulation, the Cons/Alliance picked up no support . Martin and Layton must turn the debate to the issues ASAP, before these guys get a foothold on the voters.
Now, here is their big mistake with this warning. Canadians don't trust Harper.If some horrible...ah suspicious...attack were to happen, we wouldn't turn to Harper. We would put our trust in Martin, who is popular. Bush, Harper and the CIA do not understand us. We wouldn't change government, we'd embrace the one we have. And be seriously PISSED off at the US and all Right-wing neocons.

Harper is a neocon BTW...and very dangerous!
Canadians remember...Harper stands with Bush.

.
.
.

I almost forgot.

I remember Harper saying something about that, but it slid out of my mind.

Well,that does THAT for the new Conservative party for me.

Bad enough it has alot of Mike Harriss's ideologies, and Harris is the guy that put back Ontario's Welfare/Disability/Family Benefits by a decade . .

Supporting Junior and his gang is an absolute no-no in my books, regardless whatever else any party stands for.

Bush and his minions have no regard for other countries individuality or sovereignty.

Just our luck we have lumber, water, and Junior's obsession in abundance :

OIL :scared:

Must be afraid at all times. Must be afraid at all times. Must be afraid at all times.

A terrorist strike in Canada (US or UK), might swing the vote either way - I've been thinking about this sort of thing in the context of the UK. I have no idea whether people would swing behind Labour, or move to the Liberal Dems (who are currently the most left wing party across here).

They might blame Blair et al for making us a target or take the view that voting against Blair would be to imply the terrorists had won.

It would be better for Labour if a country (eg. Canada) that had not supported the war had also been targeted (ie. We are all targets - even those that didn't support the war).

I'm making a bit of an assumption for this one, but it is in Al-Quiada's interest to keep the neocons & their allies in power - gives them something easy to target.

So cutting to the chase - if I was a terrorist I would target Canada. But then I'm not so who knows?