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
Click here to discuss this article at Canada Free Press
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.
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.
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.