This article popped up on many people's radar in the wake of the ISIS attacks in Brussels, and accordingly, I am going to indulge in my usual high octane speculation here. The article's title speaks for itself, as apparently there were clear intelligence warnings that something was going to happen, and (connect the dots here to 9/11) the authorities allowed it to happen:
The article is alleging that Western intelligence services had clear and specific warnings concerning planned attacks at the Brussels airport and subway:
The Belgian security services, as well as other Western intelligence agencies, had advance and precise intelligence warnings regarding the terrorist attacks in Belgium on Tuesday, Haaretz has learned.
The security services knew, with a high degree of certainty, that attacks were planned in the very near future for the airport and, apparently, for the subway as well.
Despite the advance warning, the intelligence and security preparedness in Brussels, where most of the European Union agencies are located, was limited in its scope and insufficient for the severity and immediacy of the alert.
As far as is known, the attacks were planned by the headquarters of the Islamic State (ISIS) in Raqqa, Syria, which it has pronounced as the capital of its Islamic caliphate.
The terror cell responsible for the attacks in Brussels on Tuesday was closely associated with the network behind the series of attacks in Paris last November.
Given the indications that ISIS is a creature to some extent of the USA and its dubious "friends" in the Middle East like Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the many-headed hydra of international terrorism once again seems to connect all the dots to Riyadh, but more importantly, as I indicated in last week's News and Views from the Nefarium, ISIS always seems to show up in places where US foreign policy is in trouble.
Which brings us to high octane speculation number one: why Europe? There is a school of thought out there that the refugee crisis is being driven in large part by the USA in order to prevent a European break with the USA and a "reset" of relations with Russia. I have also advanced the idea that perhaps the crisis is in part also being used to create a "cultural" transformation of Europe, for if one listens carefully to the growing opposition in various countries in Europe to the "open borders" policy of Berlin and Brussels, care is given to state that in the name of the various nationalisms, what is really being defended is "European culture", which, such speeches are careful to point out, is not Islamic. Creation of a "European" identity, as distinct from a specifically French or Spanish or Italian or Hungarian one, can only benefit the bureaucrats in Brussels. In this light, time will tell.
But my high octane speculation of the day really concerns Number Two: Why Ha'aretz? There's little doubt in my mind that this story may have had some intelligence backing of its own, namely, from the Mossad. But the real story here seems to me to be even deeper, for it was the very same Ha'Aretz that, among many other sources, also indicated that there were advanced warnings of 9/11, and that, again, the authorities more or less allowed it to happen, the now infamous "LIHOP" or "Let It Happen on Purpose" scenario. In short, the same 9/11 pattern now seems to have repeated itself in Brussels, on a much smaller scale. In both cases, there seems to be a widespread set of warnings from intelligence sources, and this, to my mind, argues that former British Prime Minister Tony Blair's observation about 9/11 is still in play, namely, that Al Qaeda represents a "global network", a network that he left carefully unspecified. There's no doubt that ISIS and its Middle Eastern state backers is an odious murderous entity. But if it in fact represents a portion of Mr. Blair's unspecified "global network" then eventually it will act against some of those sponsors - namely the USA - themselves.
And again.... time will tell.
See you on the flip side...