Ought one to take this article in the LA times to be the beginnings of a softening-up exercise, preparing the ground for a policy shift - broadly speaking, towards the continuation of war by other means (namely, war)?

The most canny thing the US ruling class could do right now would be to abandon “9/11” as a signifier, back away from the “war on terror”, pose as an agent of restraint and rationality responsibly managing the military affairs of a still-traumatised-but-recovering population. Have they ceased to benefit from “9/11”? Probably not yet, but they can’t draw credit on it forever. Assume that they know that.

The attack on Iran won’t be called a war (and will probably be carried out by a proxy). Management of the global “security situation” will become the buzzword. Scaring the shit out of everybody works for a while, but you end up generating chimerae like the “9/11 Truth” movement. The apocalyptic crazies have done their work: it’s time for a discourse of reassurance.