MY theory: CIA purgings, resignations means one unthinkable thing...NUKES

Bush intends to launch preemptive nuclear attacks.

now, hear me out:
We have Powell saying we have no plans to invade Iran, then he resigns. Then a host of people resign. Top levels in the CIA resign. Most of these people are people who IF we launched horrific nuke attacks would experience the political fallout.

What I think is this: we intend to preemptively attack, with nukes, Iran. Powell did his one last "lie for the gipper" to claim we aren't, then leaves so he doesn't have to anymore.
Why THAT lie, why RIGHT as he's resigning? What could be POSSIBLY be worse than invading Iraq to make him resign at THIS point? Why would all the counterterrorism folks resign also? Why at THIS point in time?

yes, I have a tinfoil hat, and its tingling right now.

now that China has signed the long-term gas and oil deal with Iran, don't you think they would get a little angry if someone messed with their new bestest buddy?

Of course, that's the rational thinking...

I posted this yesterday in another thread regarding Michael Scheur's interview on CBS's 60 Minutes where he 'almost' says that an OBL nuclear attack is a certainty:

Isn't this whole business a BACK STORY for the future "9/11"?

First of all, I'm on the west coast so haven't seen this yet. I'm going to break my general vow of not watching TV just for this.

IN THE MEAN TIME: I confess to being completely MIHOP (for the newBs, one who believes that elements within the National Security State were involved directly in the events of 9/11--Made It Happen On Purpose). Although I believe "terrorists" are something to be somewhat concerned about, the REAL issue is our foreign policy as it is driven by Wall Street greed. THAT is what makes other people want to harm us.

But I digress. I am convinced that PNAC fascists want a tactical nuclear war in the Middle East. I am also convinced that to further pursue their Middle East (and ultimately South American) agenda, they MUST INSTITUTE A DRAFT.

As things stand now, a DRAFT would be damned unpopular with all the soccer moms and naz-car dads who have little interest in sending darlings Hether and Ian off to fight and die for Halliburton and Carlyle (to name but a few).

HOWEVER a relatively small nuclear detonation (oh, say, with a death toll of something like half a million) coupled with 24/7 coverage of the carnage would so SHOCK these poor folks (not to mention the world) that the PNAC group would finally have everything they want: the draft and an excuse for tactical nuclear war in the ME.

I'll even get a bit more specific. I believe it is quite likely that this event will take place in California (my state), despite whatever Osama is purported to have said--specifically to make THE GROPENATOR look presidential. (He'll get to ride around in a hellocopter looking all in command and stuff.)

NOW, I thoroughly admit that this is nothing but my SPECULATION and may have no merit what so ever. HOWEVER, I repeat it often on this board because I believe that making such suspicions public DECREASES the likelihood that it will happen. Wishful thinking, probably, but hey. In any case, if something like this DOES happen, everyone should question.

Question everything. Where did the "terrorists" come from? WHO funds them? HOW did Sadam acquire all those WMD? WHAT ever happened to the ANTHRAX killer? WHY did Mohammad Atta eat pork chops and snort coke and have a stripper girl friend? --What we are dealing with here, folks, are BLACK OP SPECIAL AGENTS; and some of them are working for the National Security State (above military top secret level).

Everyone needs to understand that there is a picture that is MUCH BIGGER than the "terrorist" threat--which could be handled fairly easily if we modified our policies of greed. Baring that, Osama is NECESSARY to enable US Imperial Hegemony.

Edit to add:

A 'back story' is what is used to 'make sense' of an otherwise inexplicable event. The events of 9/11 are 'inexplicable' without the already established boogie man of 'fundamentalist terrorists' and 'Osama'. We'd already been told there WOULD be a terrorist attack of major proportions on US soil. When 9/11 happened, THAT was the explanation given, complete with patsy 'fundamentalist terrorists' who eat pork chops and snort coke. What is NEVER ever talked about, MUCH LESS EXPLAINED, is WHY the bag man for the 9/11 'terrorists,' a General and head of the Pakistani ISI (CIA) (Mahmoud Ahmad) was having breakfast with the heads of the Senate and House Intelligence committees ON THE VERY MORNING OF 9/11. One of those being PORTER GOSS WHO, AS THE NEWLY APPOINTED HEAD OF THE CIA, IS CURRENTLY INVOLVED IN THE PURGE WHICH INCLUDES INTERVIEWEE MICHAEL SCHEUR.

Now don't get me wrong, I think that Bush would nuke his own grandmother if Rove told him to, but Rove would tell him no such thing unless there was a percieved political advantage.

Now I do see the political advantage of starting something with Iran: they get to play the "rally 'round the flag, support the C-in-C in wartime" card all over again, whip up their chickenhawk base who like it when the USA kicks ass regardless of whose ass or why. But they'd get all those advantages without the enormous fallout (no pun intended) of a nuclear first strike if they just stuck to conventional ordnance.

If we used nukes against a country who hadn't attacked us, we would lose absolutely all of what remains of our support in the world. Those countries who are kind of pissed at us right now would become our sworn enemies. Every country on earth would pull its investments out of the US, causing an economic firestorm that would make the Great Depression look like a walk in the park. Plus, we would run the serious risk of Russia or China deciding that we've well and truly gone off the rails and it's time to take us down before we do it to them.

Sorry, I just don't see it.

China, Russia and FRANCE all have their own nuclear deterrent--We'd be toast if they tried nukes in Iran. Plus, it would spoil all of that delicious oil under their sand, so what would be in it for us?

OR if there were a detenation anywhere in THIS country or Europe and we were made to BELIEVE that it had come from OBL--which is precisely what they ARE leading us to believe.

With that they would have full power to nuke ANYONE they so choose. All they have to do is SAY they are harboring terrorists or SAY that the terrorists got the fisionable material from suchandso country, etc.

We ALREADY know that part of the missing munitions "could be used to detonate a nuclear device."

this kind of reorganisation is normal for a second-term administration; and as to the CIA, there's a new director, so that's not abnormal, either.

Although Bush may be that insane, I don't think it's likely. Especially not with Iran possibly possessing enough weapons-grade fissile material for a bomb, and missiles that will reach either Israel or Iraq (where there are a lot of US troops, remember).

The amount of resignations that this admin has seen at the levels they are occurring is NOT normal, unless you count Nixon's presidency as normal. Neither Clinton nor Reagan had this much turnover throughout on their second term. If you have data to prove otherwise, let's see it.

mildly that the 11/3 Falluja offensive wasn't nuke-u-lar. * is a spoiled, retarded little kid completely sheltered from reality. He doesn't even know the difference between nuclear and conventional weapons, except that nukes are "way cool". He WILL use nukes early in his 2nd term.

Something wicked this way comes. Not sure if it's nukes (though I'm not ruling it out), but definitely not good.

There are many ways to slice it, but they all boil down to 2 scenarios:

1. OBL is really independent (black-sheep of Saudi royal family, true enemy of U.S.) and has got his hands on nuke. In this case, the CIA mass-exodus would be a 9/11 repeat where the administration has been warned but fails to take action, but this time, the resignees won't sit by and watch America get attacked unnecessarily again.

2. OBL works for *, and in this case, a small nuke (of the suitcase variety) is being prep'd for deployment in the U.S. to put the nail-in-the-coffin that will finish off American democracy, put us into a military state, and give * the dictatorship he's been longing for. The CIA knows OBL works for * and won't stand for the mass-murder of millions for the sake of creating a dictatorship in America. At this point, the resignees are willing to risk their own safety to defend America.

I'd vote for #1.

But as it is, there are SO many unanswered questions, plus SO much other stuff, I have to say #2 is far more likely.

If this IS the case, then this is going to get real messy, real fast.

DUCK AND COVER!

and they are cashing in on his Boggieness Man.The ugly scenario of our near future, what ever it turns out to be, feels pretty logical to me right now,and I really don't think I'm going crazy(yet):shrug:

1. we get "intelligence" (not filtered through right thinking CIA) that (insert terrorist name here) that a nuke is headed towards one of our fair cities.
2. the CIA (newly scrubbed) connects the dots back to Iran and their nuclear plants
3. A city gets bombed here with a low level nuke (really our own black ops but blamed on terrorist) this would explain the mass resignations, if they knew this was the plan but wanted no part of bombing our own city.
4. major grief and outrage, larger than 9/11.
5. Bush uses that as justification to nuke all nuclear plants in Iran.

Maybe?

let's think for a moment:

WHY would you need to have the entire CIA on Bush's wavelength?

There were a lot of leaks from the CIA during the election. They are purging those "disloyal" to * for sure, but there is no way these people would have known about something such as you described - they'd be on every news show available.

It will be Syria- not as well armed, not as many of them, and they have Hussein's WMD. :eyes:

and Powell and others want NO part of it.

thing I could think of.

short of that, we could be dropping MOABS, or simulataneously declaring war on all muslim countries, or (fill in the blank)

I honestly think something is going to hit the fan, in a BIG way. Exactly what that is, I don't know for sure.

of some intelligence that has come down the pike, now that OBL knows that Bush has been re(s)elected.

IMHO, it could be either/or. Either our cabinet knows about bad stuff Bush has planned, or about bad stuff the other side has planned.

Or it could be that these guys were planning on leaving all along. I know Powell was.