Could the motives of Karl Rove's treasonous actions, be even more insidious then what is currently suspected? Ted Rall
raises some disturbing possibilities:
Now we must work backwards. Does [Karl Rove's] exposure help to explain some of the administration's most baffling foreign policy blunders?
No matter how remote, we must now consider the possibility that Karl Rove may in the employ of, and/or receiving money from, a terrorist organization such as Al Qaeda. Alternatively, could he be in the employ of a hostile foreign government? If he betrayed a CIA agent, Rove is a traitor and therefore capable of anything. Only an exhaustive investigation of his and his associates' anti-American activities, up to and including those committed by George W. Bush, can resolve these questions.
Internal sabotage offers a tempting explanation for the fact that so much has gone wrong for the United States since 2001. After 9/11, Osama bin Laden was in Pakistan-which had financed the Taliban and trained the hijackers at its camps-but Bush shocked analysts by attacking Afghanistan and Iraq instead. Was Bush's refusal to search for bin Laden in his nation of residence the result of spectacular incompetence-or a continuing alliance with the same Islamists his father's presidency had armed and funded? Are we losing the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq because of Rumsfeld's stubborn insistence on understaffing the military? Or are our leaders intentionally dragging out combat to accomplish their masters' aims: increasing the popularity of radical Islam and the recruitment of terrorists? Even Bush's domestic policies, from tax cuts paid to the rich people least likely to stimulate the economy to his attack on Social Security, seem designed to undermine U.S. stability and prosperity.
Conspiracy fodder? Yes. But when it comes to national security, we should leave no stone unturned... There have been traitors in the past, and there will be more traitors in the future.