Fear is generated when the weaker party faces an imminent attack from the more powerful rival; such emotions are not innate but the product of the circumstances. However, those who are tyrannical the fear is a constant companion that always follows them around. Thus, dictators, oppressive kings and even democratically elected leaders surround themselves with constant protection from the very people they claim to be representing. Conversely, the strong should have nothing to fear, particularly when they are also just in their conduct.
In response to Osama bin Laden’s recent election-message the response generated within the US is one of panic. How is it that a superpower can be so afraid of a handful of people with very limited resources? Such a fear cannot be attributed to the ‘weaknesses of the US or the ‘strengths’ of Al-Qaeda in military terms. The only other possible explanation is: the tyrannical behaviour of the US towards other nations that has generated this constant fear. A guilty mind will always manifests in its behaviour.
When the Arabs/Muslims see video footages of US soldiers are shooting defenceless civilians in Fallujah whilst they enjoy the actual event with their cowboy chants, it does not require think-tanks to elaborate the source of this anger and resentment. Indeed, it is not just such incidences but the oppression for the last 80 years inflicted upon the Islamic world has created this deep resentment. The current war is simply adding further fuel.
The spin factory of the US government blames ‘poverty’ as one of the major causes for this anger that has in turn led to the growth of Islamic fundamentalism. Note the measure of Islamic radicalism is not how devout the Muslims are but how much they oppose Western domination and designs in the region. Economic depravation leads to anger but that would be naturally directed at their own government unless of course if the government is noting more than a puppet of a colonial foreign power behind the scenes. Furthermore, Islamic movements are full of people from all sections of the society; Osama bin Laden himself is a multi-millionaire.
Then the likes of Richard Perle, the godfather of the neo-cons blame Al-Jazeera’s coverage of the war but not the action of the US government and its troops! Blowing up women and children is fine but not extensive media coverage of that, unless of course you are talking about American lives! Richard Perle’s motto is: even if you are in pain don’t scream and complain too loudly! If Richard had his way Abu-Ghraib would have remained a rumour generated by the conspiracy theorists.
The final argument is that the source of anger is the product of ideological indoctrination carried out by the radical Islamic scholars. Could that accusation of indoctrination not apply equally in both directions? Take a simple test; ask some ordinary Americans which is the largest Muslim country in the world. I did that, whilst I was an undergraduate at a university in Texas, the students had problem as they did not know the names of many Muslim countries. I was amused and decided to pose similar questions to the lecturers; they did not do any better. This is supposed to be coming from the cream of their society imagine its masses.
Let’s face it; the US masses are one of the most insular people of the world and perhaps the least informed. Their opinions are formed by the information received after it has been filtered by the Zionist controlled institutions.
When it comes to indoctrination, there is no contest between the powers of the high-tech mass media transmitting to all corners of earth compared to a few isolated radical Islamic scholars. In any case the anger and the uniformity of the opinion in the Islamic world are across all sections of the society – not confined to the religious parts. When your people are being uprooted, killed and oppressed you do not need external indoctrination to become emotionally charged!
Richard Perle and his neo-con cabal along with the US government are in a quest to rebuild the Islamic world in their image. The only obstacles are the "fundamentalists," i.e. those who actually resisting the West. But, why do they resist? Now that we have dealt with poverty, indoctrination, the only reason left is that they are inherently violent.
So the Americans are taught that Jihad teaches the Muslims to kill all infidels indiscriminately! In Hollywood terms they are the bad guys; recently many of these bad guys have for some reason turned out to be of French character. This simplistic view is commonly held by many Americans; insular minds are easily susceptible to brainwashing.
The reality is the something very different. First of all, Jihad is about propagating Islam not annihilating nations, which would defeat the very notion of Jihad itself. Muslims would only use Nuclear weapons (even George Bush’s mini-nukes) as a last resort in self-defence, not as a pre-emptive move for world domination or seeking national ‘security’!
Secondly, if the Muslims were violent inherently such phenomena would exist across all section of the Islamic world throughout history. So, why do the Palestinians exhibit violence but not the Malaysians? Why have the Iraqis suddenly resorted to beheadings and abductions? Did they wake up and get the Jihad bug! It is the occupation and the destruction of their countries that has generated such a response.
This week it was reported 100,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed to date, largely from the precision air-strikes that we keep hearing about; the victims are substantially made up of women and children. Obviously General Tommy Frank did not provide the data as he dislikes counting dead bodies. The source was in fact from Americans and again, it was not from Michael Moore. Yet most of the Americans continue to believe that it is the Iraqi resistance fighting in their own lands are the ‘terrorists’ not those who took 100,000 civilians. This is the ultimate proof as to who really is indoctrinated and cultured with a violent mind incapable of distinguishing between the victim and aggressor.
Thus, when Osama bin Laden appears calm and serene, delivers a message that is sound instead of a mad man waving a Kalashnikov bent on killing anyone, it causes some level of difficulty. His message was simple, an eye from an eye. Don’t undermine our security we won’t retaliate. Look at other countries like Sweden, Finland, and Switzerland, who also loves freedom, democracy and capitalism. Then comes the usual argument of 9/11 –” Richard Perle said this is the beginning of history, again the Americans need to take a look at their conduct in the region for the last fifty years. Hamas came after 1948 likewise Al-Qaeda and 9/11 came well after 1982.
Those who are impartial to this conflict might observe the one or two line responses from Kerry and Bush that sounds like ranting as opposed to addressing the points raised by Osama bin Laden. Yet, we still hear the propaganda of the rightwing cabal that Jihadist does not have a message and they are just interested in killing indiscriminately. It is as absurd as when the British government were claiming that they were trying to find out what the kidnappers of Mr. Bigley wanted, even though the rest of the world knew of their demands, i.e. release the Muslims women prisoners from the Iraqi jails.
Americans needs to understand, that their crimes will be avenged as will be the case with the Israelis. Udham Singh (also known as Mohammed Singh Azad) witnessed the cold blooded murder of his people as a child at the Amritsar massacre in northern India in 13 April 1919. The British forces fired on the unarmed civilians demonstrating peacefully. Michael O’Dwyer, was the Governor of the region, he was subsequently awarded for his service by the House of Lords, like the recent promotion given to those who were in charge of Abu-Ghraib.
Udham Sing plotted to avenge for these deaths, he travelled to England, eventually shot and killed Michael O’Dwyer in 1940. This is human nature. Hence, the children of Iraq and the children from Morocco to Indonesia may well be plotting to avenge for the US and Israeli crimes in the Islamic world. The Americans may have the biggest muscles for now but that will never give them security. A tyrant is always fearful deep down and constantly invokes security as a means to perpetuate the aggression. His defence and security constitutes the total annihilation of others or their complete subjugation.