Food supply threat analysis: Chef Obama’s “Kitchen Nightmares, new reality TV?”

According to a report broadcast yesterday by CBS News, the latest terror warning allegedly involves simultaneous attacks to our food, specifically targeting hotels and restaurants at various locations within the U.S. The exclusive CBS story adds that the threat was deemed "credible" by a key intelligence source, and that members of the Department of Agriculture and the FDA reportedly "briefed a small group of corporate security officers from the hotel and restaurant industries about it."

---

The threat is real, but not new

The threat from Muslim terrorists to poison our food and water supplies is nothing new. They've discussed taking such measures on countless internet forums and been schooled through numerous al Qaeda publications, including publications stored on U.S. servers long after their value to our intelligence agencies have been exploited. Rather than relying on corporate media sources or second-hand information about this plot, I attempted to identify the origin of this alleged threat and verify its validity. I contacted nearly every well-vetted source that has historically provided solid intelligence to me and my investigative network working within three domestic intelligence agencies under the umbrella of the U.S. Department of Security. In total, I conducted over a dozen interviews in as many hours. Each of these sources confirmed that there is indeed no shortage of Islamic terrorists who want to inflict damage on America, although this is hardly news. Based on the information collected from these interviews, however, I found absolutely no substantiation or verification, official or otherwise, of the claims reportedly made by the unidentified "key intelligence source" referenced in news reports.

Of Herrings, both red and smoked

As a long-time investigator, I am intimately familiar with the axiom that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." In that same capacity and thanks to some very good teachers, I've also honed my ability to navigate my way through the disorientating fog of disinformation that can be quite thick inside the DC beltway. I've also become proficient at identifying proverbial "red herrings" issued from within the beltway through the teachings of those same experienced and well seasoned intelligence operatives who gained their experience amid the Iran-Contra affair. Based on a thorough investigative analysis of the information obtained and discussed about the reported threat to our food supply and other matters that exist at the periphery but outside of the normal purview of these warnings, I am extremely concerned about an event or series of events that could likely impact our national security in the coming days and weeks.

Pre-9/11 indicators redux?

History has illustrated that terrorist attacks or attacks against the security of our country do not occur in a vacuum. Warning signs that exist are rarely, if ever, made public but are present if you know where to look and how to interpret such indicators. Such indicators are usually "tangential" in nature and are often publicly recognized or acknowledged only after an event has occurred. In this case, there appear to be several such indicators that suggests an event is on the "immediate" horizon. One valid although quite controversial example of a "tangential" event that preceded the attacks of 9/11 is the still unanswered matter of the surge of "put options" on the stocks of two of the airlines involved in the hijackings, financial services and reinsurance companies affected by the attacks. Readers are encouraged to go beyond the more readily available and open source internet sites, and even beyond the published 9/11 Commission report to obtain a truly accurate accounting of what really took place in the market in the weeks and days before the attacks as that exceeds the scope and intent of this report. Viewing the current warnings through the prism of that and other similar historical events, however, it is possible to see a correlation presently playing out regarding the poison plot warnings of unsubstantiated (yet widely publicized) origin. As it is important to remember that significant events don't happen in a vacuum and the parallel events or conditions exist preceding to or concurrent with such "attacks," we are compelled to expand our investigation outward to see what else is taking place beyond the obvious. Of notable significance is the report of closing activity last week at the Chicago Board of Trade involving "long positions" on commodity futures including corn, wheat and other stock as detailed by a December 14, 2010 Commodity Futures Trading Commission report. A review of the numbers indicate a significant surge in the overall "net long positions," a situation that could be loosely but legitimately compared to the put options on the airline and financial stocks prior to the attacks of 9/11. Secondly, there is measure that passed the House to overhaul the nation's food-safety laws by a vote of 215 to 144 yesterday afternoon. The infamous S.510 was originally passed by the Senate under the cover of darkness late Sunday night, and was then sent to the House for a final vote as HR 2751. Amid controversy and strong opposition to this bill, its sudden resurrection reportedly took everyone by surprise and was only accomplished through some back-room dealings in the innermost chambers of Congress. As reported by the Washington Post, Obama is expected to sign the bill into law today. Ostensibly to protect American consumers from tainted food, the bill is the largest overhaul to the nation's food laws since 1938. Despite's it's innocuous sounding name - the Food Safety Bill - it does little to actually address the safety of our food supply. At an estimated cost to Americans of $1.4 billion over the next four years, including the expense of an additional 2,000 FDA "inspectors," the law is a gift to large agribusiness and will likely place small farming operations on life support - or pull their plugs altogether. Again, I will leave it to you to perform your own research that will indeed illustrate that it is a plan for the control, and not the security of our food supply, despite what the name implies. In my professional opinion, the threats of an attack must be viewed in light of the indicators referenced. Additionally, the threats should be considered in the context of the current geopolitical climate, including the nocturnal legislative proclivities of the cheyne stoking Pelosi and Reid led congress. and what we know of the Obama administration's agenda of control. Given the indicators mentioned, it would appear that increased vigilance is required for an attack that appears to be looming on the horizon. I believe that the threat is as real as it is imminent. In this case and at this time, it is not necessarily the means or opportunity that worries me, but the motive and consequences.