Threats at Sochi expose “a larger agenda,” says intelligence source
Terrorism
at the Olympics will not be caused by “crazy Islamic homicide bombers”
as the media and many political pundits want us to believe. It is a
tactic to advance much larger agendas in the Middle East. Think bigger.
Look at the whole picture, not just where we are being directed to look.
– Doug Hagmann
By Douglas J. Hagmann
24 January 2014: “Knowing about
the terror threat to the Olympic games at Sochi is one thing.
Understanding the threat and what’s behind it is quite another. There’s a
very important back-story that no one is reporting,” stated this
source. “Understanding what’s happening behind the scenes will put
things into a certain perspective, and it’s a perspective from which
nightmares are born,” he added.
I was recently asked about the
possibility of a false flag attack at the Olympics by someone I respect.
He is well grounded and well informed, and is not someone who travels
down rabbit holes chasing alternate realities. Initially, I had not
given that angle as much consideration as it warranted. After carefully
consideration of his question, I contacted several sources active in the
intelligence community, posing the question he asked. I was somewhat
surprised to receive similar responses from each source, with one
intelligence source providing a very coherent (albeit disturbing)
scenario rooted in the current politics of the Middle East.
It appeared that I was a bit behind the
curve about the very real threat of a false flag event taking place at
the Olympics. To clarify the definition of false flag, I’ll also include
the passive act of looking the other way, allowing an event to occur,
or permitting just enough of something to happen that it would capture
the attention of the world. It certainly does not need to be on the
scale of 9/11, but could very well have similar consequences.
Consequences that could lead to global war. Despite looking at and
assessing this information daily, I was just not thinking big enough.
The following should provide you with the information and scenario that
seems to put everything into perspective.
The Olympic games are very high profile
event with multi-national participation. Any attack, terrorist event or
disruption at Sochi, whether a false-flag or “real world” action, would
be viewed as an attack on the “world’s” Olympic games, not just against
Russia. Considering everything that has gone into the planning of the
games and preparation of the venue, in this case to the tune of a
reported $50 billion, Sochi provides itself as a near-perfect venue for
such an event, which needn’t be large scale. A smaller attack or the
mere discovery of a plot having a significant potential would likely be
sufficient to enable Russian President Vladimir Putin to gain popular
support at home and globally.
We’ve already seen a number of
disconcerting things take place in the run-up to the games that should
serve as indicators of potential problems. Most telling, perhaps, is
that the Saudi Intelligence Minister, Prince Bandar bin Sultan visited
Putin last August and again in December, 2013. It is well known that
Bandar, also known as “Bandar Bush,” speaks for the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia. He told Putin that the Saudis would not authorize or support any
terror attacks during the Olympics, but they could stop such attacks under the right circumstances.
What was the message in that statement,
and specifically, what circumstances were being referenced? Through
Bandar, the Saudis delivered a backward threat over Syria and the future
of President Assad. They are strong-arming Putin over Syria, pushing
him into a corner to keep him from overtly backing Assad by military and
other means by using the threat of terrorism during the Olympics as a
bargaining chip. The Saudis are basically telling Putin to stop
providing material support to Assad. Failure to comply means that they
won’t stop terror attacks at the games, over which they appear to have
certain control. On one hand, this could not have pleased Putin. On the
other hand, it appears to have given Putin a definitive suspect, a solid
alibi, and a “free pass” of sorts relative to a terror act or incident
at the Olympics.
Those who have followed my reports on
Benghazi and its relevance to overthrowing Assad understand that Syria
holds strategic military and economic importance to Russia. We also know
that Putin has questioned the motives of the West (U.S. and U.S. led
NATO, the British, French, the Saudis and even Israel) from the Arab
Spring through present day Syria. The world has seen the chaos that
resulted from the Arab Spring and Putin does not want Syria to descend
into the same chaos via the installation of a Muslim Brotherhood regime.
So, the Olympics are being used as a
bargaining chip by the Saudis to ties Putin’s hands, at least until the
Olympics are over. Putin has so far been reserved in his responses, or
perhaps he is actually being calculating rather than reserved.
It is also noted with interest that the
threats by the so-called black widow(s) have ramped up this week.
Intelligence agencies are aware of the difficulties in getting in and
out of Sochi. The fact that a known black widow (one or more) allegedly
have been able to infiltrate Sochi is interesting, as such a journey
would be difficult at best. There are layers of security that would or
should prevent this. Could this be a signal of a possible false flag?
Perhaps.
Is the U.S. taking the threat seriously?
It appears so, as we’ve already strategically moved naval assets in
position in the event it becomes necessary to respond to an incident and
move Americans out of that area.
Historical considerations
First, it must be understood that the
Arab Spring was not a spontaneous event, but was planned in advance.
Secondly, it is important to understand what was taking place in
Benghazi that led to the attack on the CIA operations center. It was a
weapons running operation to arm the anti-Assad terrorists, spearheaded
by the U.S. in collusion with the British, French and others. My
previous reports contain sufficient documentation to support these
assertions.
We know that the so-called Arab Spring
did not start on December 18, 2010 as a spontaneous revolutionary wave
of demonstrations by people to rid themselves from the shackles of
governmental oppression. One aspect of this was the ousting of Libya’s
Gaddafi, which was detailed in a leaked 1300 word e-mail dated June 8,
2008, sent by former British Ambassador to Libya Sir Vincent Fean to
Tony Blair two years before the start of the Arab Spring.
The communication consisted of a
briefing on the state of relations between Great Britain and Colonel
Muammar Gaddafi in advance of a visit by Blair to see Gaddafi. His June
10, 2008 visit with Gaddafi would be one of six made by Blair after
leaving office and just three years before being deposed by the U.S. and
UK led interests and ultimately murdered.
We know that Benghazi was an arms
running operation as I’ve detailed in numerous articles. Putin knew
exactly what was going on and has exercised a great amount of restraint
against what he has seen as Western aggression in his back yard and
against his allies, especially Syria. Although he cannot obviously or
overtly change his tune on a dime easily, a terrorist event, or the
disruption to the games, would certainly allow Putin much more leeway in
dealing with the nation-state level attacks by proxy. Simply look at
the U.S. post 9/11.
It’s also important to understand what’s
going on in the Al Anbar province of Iraq, particularly with the terror
group ISIS. Putin correctly understands that ISIS, a Western backed
group, is being fortified during this Olympic window. They are
consolidating their forces to take their attacks against Assad to new
levels, by opening a new front from the southeastern border of Syria.
The U.S. is allowing this to happen by affirming that we would not
engage ISIS militarily, per U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.
The Western objective, from the Arab
Spring to Benghazi through the present is to topple the Assad government
and replace it with a Muslim Brotherhood regime, much like Egypt. The
consequences, through active intervention (think Benghazi) or in this
case, by a hands-off approach, will result in a serious destabilization
of the region.
Putin
Considering this situation, it is
possible that Putin, who thinks of himself as a Russian John Wayne,
could very well look the other way in the face of a terror threat, even
allowing a false-flag operation to take place. As noted, the
not-so-thinly veiled threat by the Saudis has given Putin a free pass of
sorts, the ability or the rare opportunity (plausibility) to blame the
Saudis and by extension, the West, and specifically Obama, causing them
to appear weak, indecisive and slow to act against terrorist
organizations. In that sense, it’s difficult to imagine him not to take advantage of this opportunity.
Putin is all about stage presence and is
a calculating geo-political master. He’s a very experienced player and
would capitalize on such an event by emerging as the Russian equivalent
of Ronald Reagan by making a strong, visible stand against evil forces
in the world in the event of a terrorist action, regardless of its
origin.
The larger picture
Based on information from my
intelligence contacts, I think that it is necessary to view the
likelihood of an event, perhaps a false flag event, taking place at the
Olympics as a real possibility. The importance is to understand what’s
at stake, and that such an event will not happen in a vacuum.
In the grand scheme of things, Sochi is
merely a side show, even at $50 billion. To reiterate, its real value is
that an attack here would be viewed as an attack against the entire
world. The real prize, looking long term, is the strategic advantage
Putin is seeking in Syria and in that region, in which the context of
Benghazi must be viewed.
Consider that we are in an epic battle
of nations and ideas for ownership of the next 50-100 years
economically, militarily and politically in that area. With that in
mind, if a false flag can give both pretense and support (two very
different things, related but different) to any escalation of response
by Russian forces in Syria and the surrounding region, especially
Turkey, then Putin will do it in an instant, and blame the Saudis for
it. Or any of the NATO-Western forces – the U.S., Saudis, Qatar, and
even Israel. (Remember that Saudi Arabia and Israel are tied at the hip
over Syria, which seems to have gone completely unrecognized by the
general public).
In summary, we are witnessing the
ultimate game of political brinkmanship, with terrorism by proxy being
used as the tactic at the nation-state level. Terrorism is a tactic, a
tool that is being used by nations to advance their geopolitical aims.
Terrorism at the Olympics will not be
caused by “crazy Islamic homicide bombers” as the media and many
political pundits want us to believe. It is a tactic to advance much
larger agendas in the Middle East. Think bigger. Look at the whole
picture, not just where we are being directed to look.
We are entering a very critical and
dangerous phase of a global realignment of power. Watch this very
carefully, as the future of the word is at stake.
No comments:
Post a Comment