Doubtful Conviction

Surfing the Net one evening this week, for the first time I had to wonder whether bin Laden is all he is cracked up to be. An article from Pakistan

Bin Laden coyly denies the attacks, yet no one else claims responsibility. Could bin Laden be decoy and cover boy for the real McCoys?

Lots of commentators say there must have been some kind of state support. Yet it wouldn’t have to be official support, especially in the world of undercover operations. Government employees can use their offices to arrange things after office hours, too. [3]. They want a witch hunt.

It is true that to prepare an attack like this, there must be close links within the attacking group [5]

The US has been seeking a pretext to intervene militarily against the Taliban, as reported in the Guardian. The suicide bombing against Shah Ahmed Mahsoud could have been retaliation for a CIA attempt to get him to assassinate bin Laden. Washington does not want to negotiate with the Taliban, they just want them out.

The US would also like to bomb Iraq some more, and when Afghanistan began to look like a thorny target, the Bushhawks starting pushing for this. Hard-line Washington Post columnist Hoagland advocates attacking Iraq even if it is not involved!

Of course, such punishments cannot be retaliation for the attack on the US, because the US has already been beating these countries to a pulp, as part of the perimeter defense of its Zionist beachhead in the Middle East. The US could cut off the taproot of terrorism simply by removing support for Israeli apartheid, and supporting pluralist democracy, with equal rights regardless of religion or ethnic origin, for all the people of that state.

If the US wants to fight terrorism, it should be consistent and stand against all forms of intimidation. Professional armies defend by frightening enemies, too. Instead, the strong nations control the flow of technology and even the media, which they use to proclaim that guerrilla tactics of weaker states, exclusively labeled as terror, are morally inferior.

This attack shows how much America is blinded by its one-sided dependence on technology. Absolute superiority in technology is not the only kind of military or moral superiority. No nation has ever had the moral authority to hold onto all its military conquests. It reminds me how, when I was a kid, we used to wonder what would happen if you had all the money in the world? It is an interesting thought experiment. Obviously, you have to share some to get people to do things for you, and then you don’t have all of it any more. And if you are too mean to do that, they will all turn their backs on you. The point is, we don’t have a monopoly on wits and fighting ability. We should have learned that from the Viet Cong.

America is ruled by the fallacy that we have to keep “them” poor so we can be rich. [7]

Our favorite method has been the Roman and British one of divide and conquer, to set one regional group against another, committing our own troops sparingly just to make the deciding balance. In 1942 we waited for Hitler and Stalin to slug it out. Same with the Afghan war – we stopped the Evil Empire of the Soviets with Afghan blood. Gulf war, Vietnam war, ditto. So now we’ll see America rearming the Northern Alliance. I don’t like the Taliban, but these are the classic, textbook contra tactics mentioned by Mosaddeq (3). If you apply his theory, Israel was created by Britain and the US exactly to destabilize and weaken the Muslim world. And it is our illegal colony in Palestine that has finally got us onto the front line of fire of Old World hatreds, against the most implacable of enemies – Muslim suicide bombers.

A revealing remark was made by Sec. Rumsfeld about our involvement in Afghanistan: “We’re not going to get into nation-building, we’re going to get justice”. What ignorance of statecraft – and of justice. Heaven forbid we should do a free and unsubservient people a good turn, after using them as grist to the grinder of Soviet occupation.

Conspiracy candidates

Spengler, Chalmers Johnson, and the Washington Post seem to agree on a middle interpretation: that the attackers worked mainly on their own initiative, with backing from somewhere in the Muslim world, and perhaps some loose link to veterans of the Afghan war; but the US we have created this supply of eager martyrs that anyone with an agenda of intrigue can plug into. But one writer in the Jordan Times believes Arabs have been framed by other groups that stand to benefit.

Who would benefit? Anyone who wants to see a huge military reaction: the US military-industrial complex, or an invisible clique of plutocrats behind the scenes and not answerable to any government? How would they do it? Either by actively supporting a commando group, or passively seeing to it that they are not stopped.

Who would like to see Muslims attack Christians? Could be edifying for Zionists, Hindus or atheists, i.e. Russians. How would they recruit? Using “agents of influence”, Muslims who don’t see the whole picture of what they are being led to do. Even bin Laden could be in that category.

Russia is known as the home of chess players, and this attack was a stunning move that realigned the geopolitical chessboard in Russia’s favor. A free hand in “terrorist” Chechnya, further admission to the club of “civilized” nations. The Russia theory fits in best with an Orwellian triangular model of three blocks in constant struggle: Russia, the West, and Islam, the Great Game that has been played around the Khyber pass for going on two centuries. Putin is of course a KGB officer, who got his political start with the second Chechen war, which he started in reaction to the bombing of apartment blocks in Moscow. It was widely reported that these atrocities were engineered by the secret security services, and the defendants currently being secretly tried are none of them Chechens. Why shouldn’t Russia get Western acquiescence on Chechnya with a similar trick? And in the bargain, take the other two sides of the triangle, the USA and the Muslims down a notch.

It is objected that Russians wouldn’t commit suicide. But of course, the fingers that pull the strings don’t get burned, only the martyr fodder.

Concerning a possible Israeli plot, the FBI made a strange arrest of Israelis near the WTC after bombing. According to some sources, Mossad was implicated in the 1993 WTC bombing. Israeli’s undercover services include many agents who can pass perfectly for Arabs, and Hamas was allegedly founded by Israel under Sharon as competition to the PLO. The motive – for Sharon to obtain a freer hand in crushing occupied Palestine, and to destabilize the only Islamic nuclear power, Pakistan – hopefully to get the US or India to make a strike at its weapons capacity. Perhaps that is why the ex-director of Pakistani intelligence, Hamid Gul, told Outlookindia.com he believes in an Israeli plot.

As for the US, apparently, when it comes to containing militant Islam, any ally is good, even if hitherto unloved – Russians, Jews, Hindus.

Important is that almost anyone, having a modest capacity to finance, infiltrate, and organize, can get hold of the “enriched Muslim isotopes” in the heads of millions of youths. This dangerous material is for “hire” for negative wages, for the right to die. Here we depart from the realm of rational calculation and feasible defense.

If any group under the sun can harness these janissaries against the US for their goals, whose fault is it? The responsibility is clearly with those who created the isotopes and set them loose in the world. It is the rape of Palestine over a century and 53 years of lies, manipulation, and aborted peace and democracy that have created this cancer. Who did that – we did (the very same folks who brought you that other isotope, U235). From there, the buck stops with the American Zionist lobby. Address your grievances and damages suits to AIPAC.

How high Bush piled it on that night when he intoned about an attack on freedom – The Great Lie of the Year. On the contrary, it is disloyalty to freedom, our duplicity, our double standards,  [1] The author points out how educated Arabs and Muslims are conspicuously underwhelmed by American culture. “Indeed, the experience of living in the West often turns indifferent Muslims into Islamists,” who are “just the sort of Western-educated government official that the local CIA case officer (who speaks no Arabic or Urdu) is likely to cultivate… Instead of confronting the truth, that an important section of the Islamic world elite has encountered America and rejected it, America hallucinates instead a Fu Manchu character, a pulp-novel super-villain with the capacity to reach out of a cave in the Khyber Pass and send aircraft hurtling into buildings.” ‘Spengler’ in Pakistan’s Asia Times Online, http://www.atimes.com/front/CI22Aa02.html.

[3]See “American State Terrorism,” http://167.160.86.106/mosaddeq13.html , with case studies of destabilization and overthrow of non-aligned governments by CIA-supported terror squads.

[5]A historian of American empire writes in the LA Times (Chalmers Johnson, http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/suncommentary/la-000078169sep30.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dsuncomment ) : not one of the hijackers was an Afghan; the evidence linking the attack to bin Laden is purely circumstantial; Washington is blundering into the terrorist trap by over-reacting and fueling anti-Americanism and further terrorism; the attack was not on America, but aimed at American foreign policy; if the US does not repent its militarism and support of corrupt Arab and apartheid Israeli regimes, it will become a rogue state.

[7]Public support for the wars of 1848, 1898, 1917, and 1941, which progressively got us involved to the hilt in foreign affairs, was fostered in each case by fabricated provocations and media manipulation. The aim was empire, not to make the world safe for anyone. See my “Memorial Day Tutorial”, www.mediamonitors.net/leonard15.html.

Did you like this article?