October Surprise

Jillyvn

Electoral Member
Sep 15, 2004
104
0
16
Calgary, Alberta
Re: RE: October Surprise

Reverend Blair said:
I haven't seen the tape, but CBC radio is reporting that he admits to being involved in 9-11 for the first time ever.

Hey Rev.

The video tape seems fishy to me. Firstly, he's not his usual osama self. Second, the timing is just too conveniant. My take? Bushy has him captured, and "staged" this little appearance.

I have my fingers crossed the damn Americans are smart enough to vote Kerry.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
You aren't the first one to think that Jillyvn. It wouldn't surprise me either. The Democrats can't even hint at that without looking like paranoid conspiracy theorists though, so they have to play it as if they have no doubt.

How come nobody ever remembers that in the movie Conspiracy Theory the nutty guy with all of theories turned out to be right?

The funny thing is that Osama endorsed Bush back in the spring, when it became clear that Kerry was going to win the Democratic race. He said he liked Bush better because of his incompetence. If you take a close look at the transcript from the tape it looks like he is basically confirming that endorsement.
 

Rick van Opbergen

House Member
Sep 16, 2004
4,080
0
36
The Netherlands
www.google.com
Well I don't know whether the Republicans staged this (you can also look it from the other side: Osama looked relatively healthy, which is bad for Bush and his "War On Terrorism"), but I agree that it did not seem to be the "usual" Osama.
 

vista

Electoral Member
Mar 28, 2004
314
0
16
www.newsgateway.ca
This is interesting, as commented this is the first time OBL took credit for 9/11.

OBL, September 2001, "They needed an enemy. So, they first started propaganda against Usama and Taleban and then this
incident happened. Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United States? That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks."

Will the real Osama please stand up.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape2.html

Now it seems the issue of the democrats is that Bush didn't do a good job of trying to capture him. (If it really is him.)

But as British MP, Michael Meacher, wrote in the Guardian September 6, 2003, they weren't out to catch him anyway.

"No serious attempt has ever been made to catch Bin Laden. In late September and early October 2001, leaders of Pakistan's two Islamist parties negotiated Bin Laden's extradition to Pakistan to stand trial for 9/11. However, a US official said, significantly, that "casting our objectives too narrowly" risked "a premature collapse of the international effort if by some lucky chance Mr Bin Laden was captured". The US chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Myers, went so far as to say that "the goal has never been to get Bin Laden" (AP, April 5 2002).

The whistleblowing FBI agent Robert Wright told ABC News (December 19 2002) that FBI headquarters wanted no arrests. And in November 2001 the US airforce complained it had had al-Qaida and Taliban leaders in its sights as many as 10 times over the previous six weeks, but had been unable to attack because they did not receive permission quickly enough (Time Magazine, May 13 2002). None of this assembled evidence, all of which comes from sources already in the public domain, is compatible with the idea of a real, determined war on terrorism."
 

vista

Electoral Member
Mar 28, 2004
314
0
16
www.newsgateway.ca
Zarqawi must be a little peeved right now - after being behind all those bombings, kidnappings, beheadings and now that Osama is back in town Zaqawi will have to play second fiddle as the world's international bogeyman.

The War on Terror just isn't fair.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
It will take the pressure off him for a bit. Remember that the White House nixed three attacks designed to take Zarqawi out. He's part of the plan...keep shifting the focus.

Right after the election, assuming Bush wins, there will be another attack by Zarqawi and Osama will return to the back burner.
 

vista

Electoral Member
Mar 28, 2004
314
0
16
www.newsgateway.ca
Osama then Zarqawi then Osama then Zarqawi - I just can't keep up!

Here are a couple of items for thought.

Terrorism and the Election: California is the Target! -- No postponement, just bedlam at the polls and a low turnout on the west coast is Bush's plan for 'victory'

Wayne Madsen -- The right wing had a different take on the possibility of an election postponement. Neo-fascist babble mongers like Rush Limbaugh said, “No!” to a postponement of the election. They argued that if a terrorist alert or attack were to occur, the election should go on and only those votes cast should be counted. Bingo! The plan for a second Bush administration became clear as day. And that plan’s target is California, with its whopping 54 electoral votes, and possibly Washington State’s 11 electoral votes, at stake.

Here’s the scenario we must be all be prepared for:If the pre-election internal tracking polls and public opinion polls show the Kerry-Edwards ticket leading in key battleground states, the Bush team will begin to implement their plan to announce an imminent terrorist alert for the West Coast for November 2 sometime during the mid afternoon Pacific Standard Time and that plans to declare a state of emergency in California would begin in earnest at 3:00 PM PST.

The U.S. Northern Command, which has military jurisdiction over the United States, will, along with the Department of Homeland Security and Schwarzenegger’s police and homeland security officials in Sacramento, declare an “imminent” terrorist threat – a RED ALERT -- affecting California’s major urban areas.

That is what all this talk about a terrorist attack on Election Day is about. It is to prime the population and allow Bush surrogates at Fox News, CNN, and MS-NBC to begin their perception management campaign that an attack will occur around the election. But there will be no postponement of the election or cancellation – this is simply another plan to manipulate the public through the use of phony threats and fear tactics.

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MAD410B.html

Now that Osama is conveniently back... Ridge can easily stage an alert.

October Surprise Bin Laden Appears Right On Cue

Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson -- Osama bin Laden has appeared in a new videotape accepting responsibility for September 11 and providing the 'October surprise' needed for his business partner, George W. Bush, to gain re-election.Alex Jones has privately and publicly interviewed many CIA and intelligence agents who told him directly that bin Laden died of kidney failure shortly after 9/11.
We were careful in considering that this could be disinformation but public awareness of this plan and other high-level officials reiterating the same possibility caused the Globalists to back off a full-scale capture for the time-being, but this new video provides them with all the justification needed to fulfil the same agenda.

Anyone who cannot see the sheer audacity of this development, its staging and timing, is blind. This is an incredibly transparent stunt. Recall the Cornell University study which confirmed that whenever a terror alert or a terror threat is issued, Bush's approval ratings show a significant jump.

We have an entire archive of mainstream news articles in which terror tapes, alerts and arrests are staged or manufactured at politically expedient times. A tape in which bin Laden appeared in September of 2003 was studied by experts and found to be compilations of old tapes.

The Bush administration have played down the importance of bin Laden for two years, with Bush himself even saying he wasn't worried about him. Now four days before the election and on the heels of a white man with a US accent acting as a 'vote for us or die' spokesman for the Bush administration, Osama enters the stage.This is not the first time bin Laden has popped up at the most opportune moment. In the tape released this evening, bin Laden takes full responsibility for 9/11 for the first time, according to the Associated Press.

The first time? Weren't we told that bin Laden accepted responsibility for 9/11 in a tape released in December of 2001? That tape has been flushed down the memory hole. Why? Because the tape showed a fat guy that didn't even look like bin Laden and the government later had to back away from its authenticity, it was an obvious staged fraud.

Furthermore, bin Laden heaps praise on the so-called ringleader of 9/11, Mohammed Atta, saying that he only had 20 minutes to carry out the attack.

Did Mohammed Atta get NORAD to stand down on the morning of 9/11?

Was Mohammed Atta running the wargames which confused NORAD personnel into non-action on 9/11?

Did Mohammed Atta warn Pentagon officials not to fly on the morning of 9/11?

Did Mohammed Atta warn Mayor Willie Brown not to fly on the morning of 9/11?

Was Mohammed Atta (after a heavy night's drinking in a strip club the night before) solely responsible for the hundreds and hundreds of examples of prior knowledge and government involvement that are archived on this website?

Bin Laden also highlights Bush's non-reaction to 9/11 as it unfolded, pointing out that his reading of the pet goat story gave the terrorists more time to pull off the attack. This is a blatant ploy to tarnish anyone else who questions what happened on 9/11 with the same brush. You said the same thing as bin Laden! You must be with bin Laden! You're a terrorist!

If bin Laden is truely alive and working indpendently against George Bush, then he would know that releasing this tape would only fire up Bush's base of support and any undecided voters. It makes no sense that bin Laden would do this unless he is working directly for them or this is a manufactured tape.

For anyone who has been living under a rock for over 20 years, bin Laden has been a committed CIA employee from the very start. In the spring of 186, he met with high level US government officials at the Hilton Hotel in Sherman Oaks California, under the pseudonym 'Tim Osman'. As recently at July 2001, bin Laden was meeting with CIA officials.

Make no mistake, this is the October surprise we were all waiting for. Bin Laden's scripted comeback beats that of even the Red Sox. In one way we can count our blessings that it wasn't a terror attack, but this is the military grade propaganda which Bush will ride all the way to re-election on Tuesday night.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/october2004/291004binladenappears.htm
 

grimy

New Member
Apr 11, 2004
44
0
6
Hey, I only know what I hear on the news, but it matches what the White House said and the interviews were with Cubans both in the US and in Cuba. Tremonte was quite critical of Castro and Bush...in fact she was critical of policies on both sides going back to the revolution, BTW, so you should keep in mind that it was a pretty balanced report.

Well, Rev. We all know that a revolt against the government will put Cuba into a similar state as most of the nations the United States has meddled with in the past 55 years. Chaos and grief would come over the Cuban people if such happened, and I'm quite sure the Bush regime doesn't really give a rats ass.

The hate for the US you two share between yourselves is truly awe inspiring.

Does this help?

Bush an easy target for Cuba

BUT, PETER WORTHINGTON WRITES, THIS IMPOVERISHED ISLAND'S WOES BEGIN AT HOME, NOT WASHINGTON

By PETER WORTHINGTON, TORONTO SUN

CBC RADIO'S Anna-Marie Tremonti kicked off this last week of the U.S. presidential campaign by interviewing a woman in Cuba about George W. Bush. The woman said she was speaking personally, and regarded Bush as something of a gangster, a thug who was filled with mischief towards her country. Anna-Marie went on to document how difficult it was to live in Cuba under the U.S. embargo ("blockade" is the word she used, if I remember correctly).

The woman's pension ran to $4 a month, while that of her husband, a sporadically unemployed taxi driver, was the equivalent of $6 a month.

Apart from the anti-American flavour, it was an enlightening program that created a thoroughly misleading impression: That Cuba's shortcomings were somehow linked to America's economic boycott of Cuba. This is a widely shared view, but utterly false.

The U.S. may not trade with Cuba, but every other country in the world is free to do so.

America's boycott should be -- and is -- opportunity for others. Canada, for instance, is a thriving partner with Cuba on various ventures.

Travel in Cuba and you see the Canadian flag flown alongside the Cuban one at various projects. Go to Cuba as a tourist -- a relatively inexpensive holiday -- and resort tables are loaded with food for visitors from all over the world, especially Europe.

This opulence while Cuban citizens scratch for food and stretch their ration cards.

In short, the deprivation that exists in Cuba is homegrown, and the fault of the socio-communist system it practices. Goodness -- a country renowned for producing sugar has to ration sugar to citizens!

Like most Canadians, I think the U.S. is nuts to maintain its economic boycott of Cuba. U.S. policy just feeds the myth that it is responsible for Cuban poverty.

In fact, Cuba is the most politically repressed country in the Western hemisphere. Where 20 years ago most of Latin America was deemed by the respected Freedom House to be "unfree" or "partly free," today most of South America is "free" and evolving towards greater democracy.

Not Cuba.

Although Cubans who escape their regime are arguably the only genuine political refugees in the Western hemisphere, Canada insists of viewing Cubans who seek asylum here as "economic" refugees, and liable for deportation.

A curse of being a profitable partner with a Cuban dictator.

Until this week, Cubans accepted the U.S. dollar as de facto currency, as well as the less-valued peso. No longer. Fidel Castro has decided that all dollars held by Cubans must be exchanged for pesos, with a 10% surcharge to the state. As well as a quick tax, this will also mean more hardships for Cubans (and relatives in the U.S. who send money in Cuba).

It will encourage a blackmarket in currency and is yet another indictment against the regime. While there's no overt revolutionary spirit in Cuba, it is generally accepted that when Fidel dies, changes will occur. But not until then.

It's too bad Anna-Marie Tremonti's voyage of discovery to Cuba couldn't have explored why it has failed so wretchedly to live up to the promise of revolution nearly 45 years ago. Instead, in the parts I heard, an impression was created that its hardships were another reason to hope a new U.S. president is elected Nov. 2. Sorry, Anna-Marie, but I'll bet a pina colada that Dubya is returned to the White House more substantially than he was in 2000.
 

Rick van Opbergen

House Member
Sep 16, 2004
4,080
0
36
The Netherlands
www.google.com
Just last week, there was a diplomatic row between the Netherlands and Cuba. Two Dutch politicans, along with a Spanish politician, went to Cuba to contact influential opposition leaders, but were arrested at the airport in Havana, brutally interrogated, and put back on the plane to Amsterdam. Somehow, the Cuban regime said that they were actually "American spies" - which is absolutely not the case. Actually, one of the politicians, Boris Dittrich, is the son of a Czech intellectual who fled Czechoslovakia in 1968 to the Netherlands, and therefore, personally knows what it is to flee political persecution - and because of that, wanted to support the Cuban opposition, which faces persecution too.
 

Martin Le Acadien

Electoral Member
Sep 29, 2004
454
0
16
Province perdue du Canada, Louisian
Re: RE: October Surprise

Reverend Blair said:
Hey, I only know what I hear on the news, but it matches what the White House said and the interviews were with Cubans both in the US and in Cuba. Tremonte was quite critical of Castro and Bush...in fact she was critical of policies on both sides going back to the revolution, BTW, so you should keep in mind that it was a pretty balanced report.

On the other hand, I would guess that your wife's relatives are part of the anti-Castro group, so there will undoubtedly be a bias there as well.

I also know some people who travel to Cuba. They give aid, often in the form of US funds, and they try to find out as much as possible about the well-being of jailed dissidents etc. One of them is heavily inolved in Reporters Without Borders. They are not fans of Fidel. They all say that the situation has become increasingly desperate since Bush came to power.

His policies are basically an attempt to force the Cuban people to revolt against the government by making things very bad for them. They aren't about to revolt though. They may be starving, but they understand that the embargo is making things worse for them.

Nope, Aunt Isabel was picked up as a 1945 model, way before Castro! Uncle Hector left Louisiana and shrimped in Florida around the Keys back then! She is pretty much apolitical! The Antis are those who arrived after 1959.

Batista was horrible, Castro, did do some clean up but her opinion abuot the situation is that Cuba suffers no matter who wins, so Cuba Loses! We got to visit her family on a family permit one year, very interesting to say the least!

BTW-We americans think the embargo is pretty silly with the cold war being over! But with the Americans absent, that keeps prices down for the Canadians, so says the Canadian side of the Family!

Castro tries to keep the US as his boggie man since he has to keep the people's minds off other things!

The US might invade, with bikinis and MTV, looking for the nearest daquiri stand!
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
As I said, Martin, the paperwork doesn't quite back up that version of the story. Bush has put more pressure on Cuba than any president since Reagan and he's done it in a way that hurts the people more than it it hurts the country of Cuba.

Castro would love to have a trading relationship with the US, but he refuses...rightly so considering what has happened to countries that haven't...to let the US call the political shots. That fact has angered the political establishment in the US.
 

Martin Le Acadien

Electoral Member
Sep 29, 2004
454
0
16
Province perdue du Canada, Louisian
Re: RE: October Surprise

Reverend Blair said:
As I said, Martin, the paperwork doesn't quite back up that version of the story. Bush has put more pressure on Cuba than any president since Reagan and he's done it in a way that hurts the people more than it it hurts the country of Cuba.

Castro would love to have a trading relationship with the US, but he refuses...rightly so considering what has happened to countries that haven't...to let the US call the political shots. That fact has angered the political establishment in the US.

Sadly, just playing for votes! The antis have been a big bit player in South Florida Politics since the mid 1960s when most became eligilbe to vote as US citizens! Most rhetoric issued during election time and dies off later!

Why the embargo has lasted this long is a mystery, but we still don't know who really shot JFK!
 

Andem

dev
Mar 24, 2002
5,645
129
63
Larnaka
You guys think this Usama bin Ladan tape released to Al Jazeera is the big October Surprise we've all been expecting?