Five Questions

Well, it was actually four questions, but this Christian Science Monitor article made me think about the time the present Ribbon Cutter in Chief gave this answer to the question ''Can you name the general who is in charge of Pakistan?"

''The new Pakistani general, he's just been elected - not elected, this guy took over office. It appears this guy is going to bring stability to the country and I think that's good news for the subcontinent.''

Think about this answer in light of the last three years. Certainly, Bush now knows Musharraf's name. The question is whether or not the General is genuinely willing--and able--to assist the US in tracking down fugitives like, say, Osama bin Laden. And the next time Bush crows about our "ally" in the region, remember that bin Laden and a number of others are likely ensconced in our "ally's" western provinces, the so-called "Tribal Belt," which might as well be the picture next to a definition of the term "nominal control."

The Monitor article suggests that the recent arrest of Ahmed Khalfan Ghaliani and Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan (the former, interestingly, during the week of the Democratic National Convention) will perhaps "turn the tide" if they can be coerced into providing more intelligence. That might be true, and, if so, all the better. Bin Laden and his ilk are true kooks. But I wouldn't count on it, nor do I count on Musharraf to do anything that would threaten his position. A large scale assault on his western provinces would do exactly that. Instead, I expect that certain low-level operatives will be picked up and displayed for our approval, which Bush will then latch onto in a desperate attempt to prove that he has the wherewithall to focus on something not related directly to campaigning for more than, say, five minutes (even as the entire press contingent KNOWS that it's all for show).

So, will they capture the Number 1 Wanted Fugitive? I'm beginning to doubt that will happen. Bush himself is on record saying that he doesn't care about "one man." If Osama turns himself in, sure, they'll make the arrest (and the crow about it ad nauseum). But I'm beginning to think that the Bush team is going to rely on something far more sinister for their "October Surprise." Last night on Nightline, George Stephanopolus spent the half hour consciously or subconsciously trying to scare the shit out of people (the only thing I found frightening was the bloated-ogre visage of Tony Blankley). But one person on the panel, a former Israeli military officer, security specialist, and now author, expressed a point I've heard with distressing regularity over the last month or so--that the US should expect a major terrorist attack within the next 90 days or so, i.e., prior to the election.

How do they know that?