Saved again, thank the Lord, saved again
| "Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear -- kept us
in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor -- with the cry of
grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil
at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us
up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the
exorbitant funds demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters seem
never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real."
General
Douglas MacArthur, 1957 |
The Anti-Empire Report
By William Blum
08/19/06 "Information
Clearing House" -- -- So now we've (choke) just been (gasp) saved from the simultaneous
blowing up of ten airplanes headed toward the United States from the
UK. Wow, thank you Brits, thank you Homeland Security. Well done,
lads. And thanks for preventing the destruction of the Sears Tower
in Chicago, saving lower Manhattan from a terrorist-unleashed flood,
smashing the frightful Canadian "terror plot" with 17 arrested,
ditto the three Toledo terrorists, and squashing the Los Angeles al
Qaeda plot to fly a hijacked airliner into a skyscraper.
The Los Angeles plot of 2002 was proudly announced by George W.
early this year. It has since been totally discredited. Declared one
senior counterterrorism official: "There was no definitive plot. It
never materialized or got past the thought stage."[2]
And the scare about ricin in the UK, which our own Mr. Cheney used
as part of the buildup for the invasion of Iraq, telling an audience
on January 10, 2003: "The gravity of the threat we face was
underscored in recent days when British police arrested ...
suspected terrorists in London and discovered a small quantity of
ricin, one of the world's deadliest poisons."
It turned out there was not only no plot, there was no ricin. The
Brits discovered almost immediately that the substance wasn't ricin
but kept that secret for more than two years.[3]
From what is typical in terrorist scares, it is likely that the
individuals arrested in the UK August 10 are guilty of what George
Orwell, in 1984, called "thoughtcrimes". That is to say, they
haven't actually DONE anything. At most, they've THOUGHT about doing
something the government would label "terrorism". Perhaps not even
very serious thoughts, perhaps just venting their anger at the
exceptionally violent role played by the UK and the US in the
Mideast and thinking out loud how nice it would be to throw some of
that violence back in the face of Blair and Bush. And then, the
fatal moment for them that ruins their lives forever ... their angry
words are heard by the wrong person, who reports them to the
authorities. (In the Manhattan flood case the formidable, dangerous
"terrorists" made mention on an Internet chat room about blowing
something up.)[4]
Soon a government agent provocateur appears, infiltrates the group,
and then actually encourages the individuals to think and talk
further about terrorist acts, to develop real plans instead of
youthful fantasizing, and even provides the individuals with some of
the actual means for carrying out these terrorist acts, like
explosive material and technical know-how, money and transportation,
whatever is needed to advance the plot. It's known as "entrapment",
and it's supposed to be illegal, it's supposed to be a powerful
defense for the accused, but the authorities get away with it all
the time; and the accused get put away for very long stretches. And
because of the role played by the agent provocateur, we may never
know whether any of the accused, on their own, would have gone much
further, if at all, like actually making a bomb, or, in the present
case, even making transatlantic flight reservations since many of
the accused reportedly did not even have passports. Government
infiltrating and monitoring is one thing; encouragement, pushing the
plot forward, and scaring the public to make political capital from
it is quite something else.
Prosecutors have said that the seven men in Miami charged with
conspiring to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago and FBI buildings
in other cities had sworn allegiance to al-Qaeda. This came after
meeting with a confidential government informant who was posing as a
representative of the terrorist group. Did they swear or hold such
allegiance, one must wonder, before meeting with the informant? "In
essence," reported The Independent of London, "the entire case rests
upon conversations between Narseal Batiste, the apparent ringleader
of the group, with the informant, who was posing as a member of
al-Qaeda but in fact belonged to the [FBI] South Florida Terrorist
Task Force." Batiste told the informant that "he was organizing a
mission to build an 'Islamic army' in order to wage jihad." He
provided a list of things he needed: boots, uniforms, machine guns,
radios, vehicles, binoculars, bullet proof vests, firearms, and
$50,000 in cash. Oddly enough, one thing that was not asked for was
any kind of explosives material. After sweeps of various locations
in Miami, government agents found no explosives or weapons. "This
group was more aspirational than operational," said the FBI's deputy
director, while one FBI agent described them as "social misfits".
And, added the New York Times, investigators openly acknowledged
that the suspects "had only the most preliminary discussions about
an attack." Yet Cheney later hailed the arrests at a political
fundraiser, calling the group a "very real threat".[5]
Perhaps as great a threat as the suspects in the plot to unleash a
catastrophic flood in lower Manhattan by destroying a huge
underground wall that holds back the Hudson River. That was the
story first released by the authorities; after a while it was
replaced by the claim that the suspects were actually plotting
something aimed at the subway tunnels that run under the river.[6]
Which is more reliable, one must wonder, information on Internet
chat rooms or WMD tips provided by CIA Iraqi informers? Or
information obtained, as in the current case in the UK, from
Pakistani interrogators of the suspects, none of the interrogators
being known to be ardent supporters of Amnesty International.
And the three men arrested in Toledo, Ohio in February were accused
of -- are you ready? -- plotting to recruit and train terrorists to
attack US and allied troops overseas. For saving us from this horror
we have a paid FBI witness to thank. He had been an informer with
the FBI for four years, and most likely was paid for each new lead
he brought in.[7]
There must be millions of people in the United States and elsewhere
who have thoughts about "terrorist acts". I might well be one of
them when I read about a gathering of Bush, Cheney, and assorted
neocons that's going to take place. Given the daily horror of Iraq,
Afghanistan, Lebanon and Palestine in recent times, little of which
would occur if not for the government of the United States of
America and its allies, the numbers of people having such thoughts
must be rapidly multiplying. If I had been at an American or British
airport as the latest scare story unfolded, waiting in an
interminable line, having my flight canceled, or being told I can't
have any carry-on luggage, I may have found it irresistible at some
point to declare loudly to my fellow suffering passengers: "Y'know,
folks, this security crap is only gonna get worse and worse as long
as the United States and Britain continue to invade, bomb,
overthrow, occupy, and torture the world!"
How long before I was pulled out of line and thrown into some kind
of custody?
If MacArthur were alive today would he dare to publicly express the
thoughts of his cited above?
Policy makers and security experts, reports the Associated Press,
say that "Law enforcers are now willing to act swiftly against
al-Qaeda sympathizers, even if it means grabbing wannabe terrorists
whose plots may be only pipe dreams."[8]
Commonly, the "terrorists" are watched for many months, then the
police pounce on them at a politically opportune time. The reasons
in the current case may stem from some aspect of the Blair and Bush
administrations being under attack from all sides, including the
defeat of super war-supporter Senator Joseph Lieberman (just 36
hours before the British announcement), and the upcoming November
elections, when the Republicans will be running on the War on
Terrorism issue. "Weeks before September 11th, this is going to play
big," said a White House official, adding that "some Democratic
candidates won't 'look as appealing' under the circumstances."[9]
Referring to the alleged UK terrorism plot, the New York Times
reported that: "The White House and the Republican Party had pounced
on that news, along with the defeat of Senator Joseph I. Lieberman
in the Connecticut Democratic primary by an antiwar candidate, Ned
Lamont, to paint the Democrats as weak on national security. Mr.
Cheney had gone so far as to imply that the defeat of Mr. Lieberman,
a strong backer of the war, would embolden 'Al Qaeda types'."[10]
Vote Republican or the terrorists win!
The announcement of this particular terrorist threat may also be
explained by this news item:
"Much of the televised discussion yesterday concerned the
investigative tools available in Britain that U.S. officials credit
with allowing authorities to get ahead of the plot before it proved
catastrophic. [Homeland Security Secretary Michael] Chertoff said
the ability to monitor monetary transactions and communications and
to arrest suspects for a period of 28 days on an emergency basis
made a significant difference in the case."[11] We should be hearing
further from the administration about these things.
The American Empire for Dummies (an excerpt from an unwritten book)
1. The United States is determined to dominate the world, not to
mention outer space. This is not a left-wing cliché, the empire's
leading lights trumpet Washington's desire, means, and intention for
domination, while assuring the world of the noble purposes behind
this crusade. Since the demise of the Soviet Union, these
declarations have been regularly put forth in policy papers
emanating from the White House, the Pentagon, and think tanks
closely associated with the national security establishment. They
make it perfectly clear that any potential rival to the world's only
superpower must be, and will be, seriously challenged. Here is the
first of these warnings, from 1992: "We must maintain the mechanisms
for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger
regional or global role."[12]
2. World domination includes dominating the Middle East; one might
say particularly the Middle East. (See chapter 3, "Oil", and chapter
6, "Israel". Please note that there is no chapter on "Democracy and
Freedom".)
3. In recent times only Iraq, Syria and Iran have stood in the way
of US Middle East domination ("remaking the Middle East" is the
usual euphemism). Iraq is now a basket case.
The basketizing of Syria awaits only a quasi-plausible excuse, which
it was hoped Israel would provide by provoking a hostile Syrian
reaction in the recent Israeli-Lebanon war.
The US-Israeli assault on Lebanon was aimed at basketizing Hezbollah
so that it couldn't come to the aid of Iran by attacking Israel
during the basketizing of Iran; the latter may begin with sanctions,
approved by a pliant Security Council. This was one of the key ways
the basketizing of Iraq began. Do not believe the canard that France
is hostile to US foreign policy. Time and again, both in and out of
the Security Council, France has raised a little objection to this
point or that point of Washington's policy because it needs to
pretend and feel that it's still a great power and has a significant
role to play in world affairs, but in the end it smooths the way for
the empire.
And Germany against the US war in Iraq? Hardly. Germany has helped
the American war effort in half a dozen important ways, including on
the ground in Iraq, even while German politicians ran on an
anti-Iraq War platform.
Carlos Romulo, former president of the UN General Assembly: "If
there is a problem between a weak nation and another weak nation and
the UN takes action, the problem disappears. If there is a problem
between a strong nation and a weak nation and the UN takes action,
the weak nation disappears. If there is a problem between a strong
nation and a strong nation and the UN takes action, the UN
disappears."
4. World domination also includes Central Asia and its massive oil
and gas reserves. Afghanistan with its pipelines and US military
bases is vital to this undertaking. Through one war or another in
recent years, the United States has managed to establish military
bases/facilities throughout the region, including in Pakistan,
Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Georgia, vital to protecting
the pipelines to the eastern Mediterranean; one of the pipelines
will extend to Israel, which, along with Turkey, is expected to play
a role in the protection of the area.
William Blum is the author of:
Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War 2
Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower
West-Bloc Dissident: A Cold War Memoir
Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire
Portions of the books can be read, and copies purchased, at
www.killinghope.org
NOTES
1. Vorin Whan, ed. "A Soldier Speaks: Public Papers and Speeches of
General of the Army Douglas MacArthur" (1965)
2. The Daily News (New York), February 10, 2006
3. Washington Post, April 14, 2005; United Press International,
April 18, 2005
4. Time, July 7, 2006, article by Joshua Marshall; Associated Press,
July 14, 2006
5. Sears case: Knight Ridder Newspapers, June 23, 2006; The
Independent (London), June 25, 2006; St. Petersburg Times (Florida),
June 24, 2006; New York Times, August 13, 2006
6. Associated Press, July 14, 2006
7. Associated Press, April 18, 2006
8. Associated Press, July 8, 2006
9. Agence France Presse, August 11, 2006
10. New York Times, August 17, 2006. p.23
11. Washington Post, August 14, 2006, p.9
12. "Defense Planning Guidance for the Fiscal Years 1994-1999", as
quoted in New York Times, March 8, 1992, p.14, emphasis added
13. NPR, Day to Day, August 1, 2006, 12:08 pm
Are Comments Offensive? Unsuitable? Email us