Skip to content or view screen version

Self-Loathing and the Denial of Terrorism

A 9/11 Truth heter... and anarchist | 09.06.2006 00:21 | Anti-racism | Terror War

etc.

You're an enlightened world citizen. Your T-shirt says "9/11 was an inside job." You're pretty sure we're living in a fascist state, that President Bush taps the Dixie Chicks' phones, Christian abortion clinic bombers outnumber jihadis, and the war on "terror" is a distraction from the real threats: carbon emissions and Pat Robertson. Then you learn that 17 people were arrested in a terrorist bomb plot. How do you process the information? Let's take it step by step.

Gosh, that's horrible, you think. But no -- that's what they WANT you to feel. Recall the prime directive: Question Authority (unless he's a college professor). The plotters must have been impoverished olive farmers radicalized by the removal of Saddam Hussein. Why, if someone came in and toppled your president, you'd go to their country and ... well, you'd thank them. Unless they did it for the wrong reasons! Then you'd blow something up. Like an SUV dealership. At night. Anyway, you understand; you care a lot about Iraqis these days. You think about Iraq more than China, to be honest, but it's not as if you'll scrape off your "Free Tibet" bumper sticker -- unless it's to make room for "Free Darfur." Or "Hands Off Darfur," depending.

Wait a minute: The "terrorists" were Canadian? You can understand someone blowing up trains in Spain and London. They sent troops to an illegal war cooked up by neocons who want to kill brown people for Exxon and Jesus, or something. You can understand, reluctantly, blowing up teens in an Israeli pizza parlor, because the Jews took the West Bank from the sovereign, ancient nation of Palestine. (How can a liberal socialist country behave so poorly? The world is full of mysteries.) But Canada? Isn't Michael Moore from Canada? You can get medical marijuana from married gay doctors in Canada, and no one has guns. You console yourself: Maybe they were really planning to attack the U.S.

You realize the suspects were all Muslim, and you dread the inevitable pogroms. Haven't been any yet, but any day now. You read that a mosque was vandalized in Toronto after the arrest, and you feel a certain grim relief. Finally, racism! Banners. If you're going to have a march, you'll need banners.

But wait. You read that the suspects were not connected to al-Qaida, and you're confused for a moment. Maybe it won't be over if they get Osama bin Laden (provided he isn't really in an supersecret Idaho prison). What if the "terrorists" hate you for their own reasons? The evildoer-in-chief said "they hate our freedoms" -- as if we have freedoms, really, just try and get a bike-messenger job that has full health benefits. But what if rights and mixed-sex education and an economy based on sustainable hemp-based art installations mean nothing to them?

Maybe you could convince them to hold off while you fix Amerikkka. At least you can get it down to one k. Maybe if the Democrats take the House back. A 10-seat swing won't make the imams cool down, but 20 seats, in red states? Would that be a good-faith effort?

You worry this will push Haditha off the front page. It's very important that everyone concentrate on the atrocities committed by U.S. troops every day. (It's such a relief not to have to pretend to support the troops anymore.) Anyway, nothing happened. Nothing blew up. If the suspects were planning something, they didn't do it, and this proves we can handle this as a law enforcement matter. Even though the police are racists.

Your head hurts.

You have a friend in Toronto. She's cool. It would kill her if these arrests were made possible by NSA eavesdropping.

You find yourself almost wishing there was another real attack, so people could see the logical consequences of "fighting back" after 9/11. Yes, it would be bad, but sometimes you have to break an egg to show people the health impact of omelettes. Is it wrong to wish the Canadian terrorists might have succeeded?

Shouldn't you know the answer to that question?

A 9/11 Truth heter... and anarchist

Comments

Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments

Yawn ...

09.06.2006 04:31

Thanks, Plant, for making this "conservative" commentary available to people who don't visit the sites operated by Useful Idiots like you. I think I'll await the disclosure of evidence before buying any of your speculation. Your side's been wrong on so very many issues as of late ...

Let's not forget that the Canadian security establishment, with the help of their southern cousins, of course, leveled similar accusations two years ago - which were similarly sensationalized by those who support massive State Terrorism - against sixteen people who turned out to be innocent.

Two of the men accused have a history with the Canadian military, the evidence hasn't been forthcoming and seems to suggest Entrapment, and let's not forget the words of Don Rumsfeld, who said the US and its allies would attempt to incite groups to act violently.

And even if they are found guilty as charged, this does not for one moment excuse the indefensible policies of the criminal Neo-Fascists, the lives they've told, nor the massive slaughter of innocent men, women, and children.

Nor does it make up for the complete lack of evidence to support the "evil Arabs" Conspiracy Theory, regarding 911, the "useful crisis" which gave rise to this agenda of death ...

Gloating Over Alleged Actions?


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Excellent

09.06.2006 05:45

Congratulations on having the guts to say what many of the intellectual Left have up until now only been thinking. The reality of the war against terrorism is that the "enemy" doesn't give a damm for our understanding of their motives, empathy for the viewpoint or sympathy with their aims. Al Quada and its children is commited to one simple never varying goal, the establishment of an Islamic world. Nothing more nothing less. The US and others is attacked because it represents the biggest single obstacle to that aim.

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend" has never been more wrong in this case. Radical Islam is as much a threat to my Muslim neighbour as it is to the rest of us. Take the time to read the translation of Osama Bin Laden has said,

He is waging war against the West because it is stopping his aim of having the whole of the Middle East rules by clerics.
The issue of Palestine will be solved by the death of every Jew, he doesn't want a compromise, a sharing of Jeruselam, a twin state solution - he wants every Jew dead
Non Muslims have no value, either they submit to the will of Allah or they die
Women should be veiled and do not need to learn to read, Men can read them the Koran

Those in Iraq still fighting are followers of this philosophy, they are not some glorious defenders of their homeland as some on the Left would like to imagine them. They seek a fundamentalist Islamic state in the model of Iran. Imagine an Iraq run by them, what do you think is better for the long term in Iraq, an elected Iraqi government backed by US and UK forces or a bloodbath of religious inspired hatred ? "Bring the Troops Home" would cause that.

It is too easy to say the invasion of Iraq was "all about oil", what is quickly forgotten is that the West could get all the oil it wanted from Iraq without invasion, Iraq was keen to sell it, desperate to sell it. Saddam Hussain signed an agreement with the French oil giant ElfTotal only a couple of months before the invasion (hence real Chirac's objection to the war) and would have happily signed one with any of the UK or US oil companies if they had offered as much as the French. The US invaded Iraq for the reason it knows and most military analysts have known for years, Iran. Iran has been the biggest threat to Middle Eastern peace for years, it sponsers terrorism, it seeks nuclear weapons and it has had a succession of radical Islamic leaders culminating in the present one who subscribes to a belief in the return of the Fourth Prophet and a Muslim world by force. By having troops i Iraq on the Iranian border the US and UK know they can control Iranian expansionist wishes and cause enough problems for the leadership to prevent further problems. The US doesn't need to invade Iran (and it won't) it just needs to be in site. The US, Polish and UK troops on the Iranian border and not there as a preperation for invasion they are there to say to Tehran "look at us" .

Radical Islam (not mainstream) represents the biggest threat to global security since the end of the Cold War, it will be a fight our children will have to inherit but fight it we must or the consequences are too terrible to contemplate. The consequences for a "human rights" loving, take to the streets when I don't like something, diversity embracing, animal rights esposing left of centre radical or anarchist will be worse.

impressed


Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments