Karl Rove's False Flag Operations
Mon Aug 13, 2007 22:52
 

 
Karl Rove's False Flag Operations
http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/001666.html

With Karl Rove leaving the White House, it's a good time to remember this intriguing story from his career:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200411/green/3

...as I interviewed people who knew Rove, they brought up examples of unscrupulous tactics—some of them breathtaking—as a matter of course.

A typical instance occurred in the hard-fought 1996 race for a seat on the Alabama Supreme Court between Rove's client, Harold See, then a University of Alabama law professor, and the Democratic incumbent, Kenneth Ingram. According to someone who worked for him, Rove, dissatisfied with the campaign's progress, had flyers printed up—absent any trace of who was behind them—viciously attacking See and his family. "We were trying to craft a message to reach some of the blue-collar, lower-middle-class people," the staffer says. "You'd roll it up, put a rubber band around it, and paperboy it at houses late at night. I was told, 'Do not hand it to anybody, do not tell anybody who you're with, and if you can, borrow a car that doesn't have your tags.' So I borrowed a buddy's car [and drove] down the middle of the street … I had Hefty bags stuffed full of these rolled-up pamphlets, and I'd cruise the designated neighborhoods, throwing these things out with both hands and literally driving with my knees." The ploy left Rove's opponent at a loss. Ingram's staff realized that it would be fruitless to try to persuade the public that the See campaign was attacking its own candidate in order "to create a backlash against the Democrat," as Joe Perkins, who worked for Ingram, put it to me. Presumably the public would believe that Democrats were spreading terrible rumors about See and his family. "They just beat you down to your knees," Ingram said of being on the receiving end of Rove's attacks. See won the race.

In addition to this, there are longstanding suspicions that in the 1986 governor's race in Texas, Rove bugged his own office so it would be blamed on the Democratic candidate.

This illustrates why I'm driven crazy by claims that we shouldn't suspect politicians have done something grimy because they're "honorable men." Nothing's clearer in human history than that politicians will do anything, including murdering millions of their own citizens, to get and hold power.

Thus, it's never crazy merely to consider the possibility that anything anywhere is a false flag operation. Usually it's not the case—usually things are pretty much what they seem.

But what holds politicians back from doing more of this is that it's generally so complicated they'll get caught, not some kind of "moral" consideration. For instance, I do think it's nuts to consider the U.S. government was involved in 9/11, because too many people would have to be involved. But I strongly suspect George Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove would have considered it if they thought they could get away with it. Certainly immediately afterward they were willing to lie to New Yorkers and let them die from breathing the air in lower Manhattan.
Posted by Jonathan Schwarz at August 13, 2007 03:57 PM | TrackBack
Comments

Mostly agreed, though I think there's probably a psychological difference between lying about air quality and ultimately causing deaths that way and actually having someone fly a plane into a building. But I'm not sure. It is interesting to wonder just how far politicians would go if they thought they could get away with it--if there are any limits to what some of them would do.
Posted by: Donald Johnson at August 13, 2007 05:08 PM

It's not fashionable to bring up 9/11, since there's a whole host of kooky theories surrounding it, but I still feel like a whole bunch of my questions surrounding the day itself were unanswered. For example, the 911 commission report has no discussion of FAA preparedness and of how FAA procedures were followed, or not, on that day. This seems especially bizarre considering the timing of the hijackings, the huge gap between the WTC and the Pentagon events, and the near-certainty that people knew exactly what was happening, at least at the Pentagon, before it happened. Absent answers to these questions, I will, as I suspect will a great many people with a similar distrust of authortiy, fly to the False Flag position - openings were left to allow things to happen. The Pentagon turned out to be a relatively modest target. If the White House, or the Capitol, had been struck - imagine that. So why wasn't that plane intercepted, redirected, forced down?
Posted by: saurabh at August 13, 2007 05:43 PM
MORE:>>
http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/001666.html

=======
Karl Rove in a Corner
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200411/green/3
(page 3 of 3)

ow Rove has conducted himself while winning campaigns is a subject of no small controversy in political circles. It is frequently said of him, in hushed tones when political folks are doing the talking, that he leaves a trail of damage in his wake—a reference to the substantial number of people who have been hurt, politically and personally, through their encounters with him. Rove's reputation for winning is eclipsed only by his reputation for ruthlessness, and examples abound of his apparent willingness to cross moral and ethical lines.

In the opening pages of Bush's Brain, Wayne Slater describes an encounter with Rove while covering the 2000 campaign for the Dallas Morning News. Slater had written an article for that day's paper detailing Rove's history of dirty tricks, including a 1973 conference he had organized for young Republicans on how to orchestrate them. Rove was furious. "You're trying to ruin me!" Slater recalls him shouting. The anecdote points up one of the paradoxes of Rove's career. Articles like Slater's are surprisingly few, yet as I interviewed people who knew Rove, they brought up examples of unscrupulous tactics—some of them breathtaking—as a matter of course.

A typical instance occurred in the hard-fought 1996 race for a seat on the Alabama Supreme Court between Rove's client, Harold See, then a University of Alabama law professor, and the Democratic incumbent, Kenneth Ingram. According to someone who worked for him, Rove, dissatisfied with the campaign's progress, had flyers printed up—absent any trace of who was behind them—viciously attacking See and his family. "We were trying to craft a message to reach some of the blue-collar, lower-middle-class people," the staffer says. "You'd roll it up, put a rubber band around it, and paperboy it at houses late at night. I was told, 'Do not hand it to anybody, do not tell anybody who you're with, and if you can, borrow a car that doesn't have your tags.' So I borrowed a buddy's car [and drove] down the middle of the street … I had Hefty bags stuffed full of these rolled-up pamphlets, and I'd cruise the designated neighborhoods, throwing these things out with both hands and literally driving with my knees." The ploy left Rove's opponent at a loss. Ingram's staff realized that it would be fruitless to try to persuade the public that the See campaign was attacking its own candidate in order "to create a backlash against the Democrat," as Joe Perkins, who worked for Ingram, put it to me. Presumably the public would believe that Democrats were spreading terrible rumors about See and his family. "They just beat you down to your knees," Ingram said of being on the receiving end of Rove's attacks. See won the race.
MUCH MORE:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200411/green/3

Main Page - Friday, 08/17/07

Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]

APFN MESSAGEBOARD ARCHIVES

messageboard.gif (4314 bytes)