Skip to content or view screen version

Who really benefits from 9/11 and the ‘War on Terror’?

Louise Almond | 21.09.2010 16:26 | Anti-militarism | Anti-racism | Terror War | World

Report from  http://londontruthaction.org at the April 2010 Counter Terror Expo at London Olympia





By Louise Almond
londontruthaction.org
21st September, 2010

‘Who really benefits from 9/11 and the ‘war on terror’?’ asked our banner at the Counter-Terror Expo 2010.

‘We do! It keeps us in work…’ was the jovial response from a passing group of Navy personnel.

Quite.

But 9/11 has not just provided the foundational myth that has allowed the Anglo-American governments to justify increased ‘defence’ spending on their modern day crusades, unhindered by public opinion and international law; the terror myth has also provided a huge boost to many private sector businesses including, of course, the counter-terror sector. It is a multi-billion dollar industry, which, as a CIA insider told Harper’s magazine in 2006 [1], plays a large part in driving government policy – an extension of the already all-powerful arms industry. And it has an annual trade show in London.

The Counter Terror Expo describes itself as ‘the premier global event for professionals tasked with ensuring a formidable and effective response to the threats we face today.’ [2] Exhibitors range from the worlds largest arms manufacturer BAE Systems [3] to small, seemingly unrelated businesses such as Highway Care Ltd, and visitors came from a wide variety of professional backgrounds and nationalities. Both exhibitors and visitors provided an interesting audience to talk with about the questions surrounding 9/11 – an important audience to convince that while they may benefit in financial terms from the terror myth, the unending resource wars it is used to justify are, literally, costing the earth.

So our action was very simple – turn up in the morning, give out leaflets to the people queuing to get in, and try and engage them in conversation. What I gained from this action was a concrete realisation that regardless of the people one is tasked with talking to – arms dealers, military officials, war criminals – it is of paramount importance to remember that these people are human beings. Here’s why:

Throughout the morning we all talked with the people queuing round the block to visit the expo, giving out leaflets documenting mainstream media articles that contradict the official account of 9/11 [4] and discussing our differing perspectives on that information. Obviously not everyone was receptive to our message but through being cordial and non-confrontational we managed to talk to a lot of people and get a lot of leaflets into hands.

After a few hours (and a little too late, as the queue had died down considerably) a group of anti-arms protesters turned up and immediately started on the offensive with shouts of ‘Shame on you’. An attempt to chalk the outside of the Exhibition centre led to several of the protesters being involved in a scuffle with police and then four riot vans turning up [5]. For the three or more hours we had been there, there had been only two very friendly police officers keeping a casual eye on things, but suddenly there was a line of police guarding the front of the hall.

Obviously I completely understand the passions felt by the protesters. The arms industry and its callous desire for ever-increasing profits is the money-hungry, blood-thirsty core of the Anglo-American war machine. But those which are responsible for its design were not likely to be in attendance at the Counter-Terror expo on a cold and rainy April morning, and even if they were would they listen to people who are shouting at them? One has to ask as an activist how effective it is to be angry. In fact while expressing anger may help you to feel better, it is likely to alienate your message from the people who need to hear it most – those who can actually make the choices required to exert real change.

What must be understood is that people working in industries such as counter-terrorism or institutions such as the police force and armed forces, are actually on the receiving end of an even bigger propaganda machine than your average Joe. These people are constantly pumped full of fear, endlessly told we are on high terror alert from unseen dark forces both within and without of our national borders. To appear at their side, caterwauling slogans of hatred and fighting with police officers only makes them assume that you too must be feared, that you do not in fact want peace, but the mounted head of an arms dealer on your wall as a trophy of your anti-establishment credentials.

If we are ever to end war, if we are ever to uncover the truth, then we must drop all concepts of division and communicate with one another on a human level – Campaign Against the Arms Trade protester and BAE systems worker, English Defence League marcher and Unite Against Fascism activist, Peaceful dissident and SAS soldier. We must talk with passion and clarity and we must listen with compassion and intent. Most of all we must remember that human beings are being attacked with tools of psychological warfare and propaganda never before imagined [6], they are not ignorant nor apathetic, but very scared. And it is only through leading by example and showing love to all people, that we can truly show humans need not fear one another and so by extension have no need for a counter-terror industry.

Photographs courtesy of Yvonn Jakobsen

Endnotes

[1] ‘Meet the Counterterrorism-Industrial Complex’, Harpers Magazine (September 19th, 2006)  http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/09/sb-meet-the-counterterrorism-1158675678

[2] Counter Terror Expo  http://www.counterterrorexpo.com

[3] ‘BAE Systems Tops List of Biggest Arms Companies’, New York Times (April 12th, 2010)  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/business/global/13arms.html?_r=1

[4] The londontruthaction outreach leaflet consists entirely of facts as reported by the mainstream media – hundreds of which are documented by Jon Gold in his article ’9/11: The Facts Speak For Themselves’  http://londontruthaction.org/2010/08/25/911-the-facts-speak-for-themselves/

[5] Photographs courtesy of Peter Marshall  http://mylondondiary.co.uk/2010/04/apr14-02.htm

[6] Dir. Scott Noble  http://metanoia-films.org/psywar.php

Louise Almond
- e-mail: londontruthaction@gmail.com
- Homepage: http://londontruthaction.org/2010/09/21/who-really-benefits-from-911-and-the-war-on-terror/

Comments

Hide the following 9 comments

Very democratic.......

21.09.2010 18:44

This is a reply i tried to put on their blog but they have the comments disabled (seriously, have a look  http://londontruthaction.org/2010/09/21/who-really-benefits-from-911-and-the-war-on-terror/) so its going here instead:

heya, gotta email cause your comments are turned off (very democratic) but lets hope that 'truth' is open to subjective debate on your blog in the future.

"After a few hours (and a little too late, as the queue had died down considerably) a group of anti-arms protesters turned up and immediately started on the offensive with shouts of ‘Shame on you’. An attempt to chalk the outside of the Exhibition centre led to several of the protesters being involved in a scuffle with police and then four riot vans turning up [5]. For the three or more hours we had been there, there had been only two very friendly police officers keeping a casual eye on things, but suddenly there was a line of police guarding the front of the hall"

Now I was there that day and I was one of the anti-arms protestors who 'started on the offensive.' Now fair enough, we wern't quiet and I see no reason why we should be but I can hardly see how shouting 'shame on you' is going on the offensive,a couple of people were singing bob dylan songs (wound me the fuck up but hey, each to their own) and 'thats not what democracy looks like' and these can hardly be considered aggresive songs, and I dont see how you could describe 'shame on you' as aggressive without some serious hypocrisy - your name is truth action? well these people have got a lot to be ashamed about and need to be told, that was our action and I think you need to remember who's on your side, out of 8 paragraphs 3 of them - thats nearly half the article- are completely off topic, 2 of them flat out denouncing other (non violent may I add) activists and then another one telling people how to register their protest. How do you ever expect to recruit new people when before you've even started preaching your actual politics your already telling them what to do? You're anti-war protesters like we are and you drew a line of division that day not us, when your lot actually bothered to cross the road and escape from the safety that 4 lines of traffic provides (how many people do you think could have actually read your banner if they wanted to?) they were welcomed, even when they decide that instead of protesting with us they are going to sit down and meditate in front of the building for the biggest photo op moment I have witnessed since russel brand at g20 (self rightous prick)* we kept in good spirits, we didnt tell him to stop, we didnt denounce him on our blog, we let him crack on making a tit of himself - in the publics eyes that's the brush we all would have been tarred with had that been the image the press'd picked, but we let him carry on unchallenged.

You lot still dont get it, what movements need to succeed is diverse tactics happening at the same time - a static demo here, a leafleting session there, a lock on or two in another place, a moving demo in another place and a militant block in another, it keeps the police on their toes and when the organisers of these events see the chaos we are capable of creating they shut it down. All things are won through some level of fear when it comes to single issue causes - you think trade unions would ever win if the management weren't scared that they were losing money? you think the civil rights movement would have won if they weren't scared that blacks were going to continue to boycott? and you think that a MASSIVE recent win like seattle would have happened if the organisers weren't scared of they're delegates safety? (again mostly from non violent direct action)

You lot are no better than the counter terror groups inside labelling people extremists, it wont be long until they come after you and you might find that they'll be no one else to resist then when everyone else has already been taken.If you wanna continue being a protest group under the moniker 'truth action' then you are going to have to get involved with some action at some point, otherwise you are london truth lobbyists and nothing more

peh, wonder if this will even get close to publication - you lot won't even let informed, subjective debate on your own blog comments section, i guess outside contributers are about as likely as george bush admitting 9/11 was a stitch up.

Peace, love and petrol bombs

* The picture of this is actually in the article and it might be interesting for any readers who weren't there to know that he was sat on the floor for all of 10-15 seconds whilst the bald guy in the shot took a photo. He then stood up, walked behind the line of protestors this article complains about and did fuck all for the rest of the demo.

David E


who

21.09.2010 19:45

Well from what I can see, the only people REALLY getting benefit out of the war on terror are the protestors

Gravy train, something to shout about and no responsibility or aim to do anything else to stop the problem. Perfect.

anon


and

22.09.2010 00:01

And don't forget the guys who sell the "9/11 is a hoax" books and charge £££££££ for their £ectures.

anon two


Reply

22.09.2010 00:03

"Obviously I completely understand the passions felt by the protesters. The arms industry and its callous desire for ever-increasing profits is the money-hungry, blood-thirsty core of the Anglo-American war machine. But those which are responsible for its design were not likely to be in attendance at the Counter-Terror expo on a cold and rainy April morning, and even if they were would they listen to people who are shouting at them? One has to ask as an activist how effective it is to be angry. In fact while expressing anger may help you to feel better, it is likely to alienate your message from the people who need to hear it most – those who can actually make the choices required to exert real change."

Hi Louise,

A quick flick through the history books of resistance would show up that it has been very effective being angry, look at the suffragettes.

Who exactly has the choices required to exert real change? as far as I remember, it was us, the workers. Those who deal in death, or wage slavery are the ones resisting real change, or are you entrusting our lives, and the life of the planet to the elite? To appeal to the humanity of those oppressing us, to beg for scraps from the table, or to try to get corporations to "reform" has never got us anywhere. But when people are fucking angry, you see a different story. What's wrong with anger anyway? And do you really think yours is the only right way to do things? - I hope not, that's SWP style, but then I would kinda half expect that from the truth movement.


Anger


sub-text

22.09.2010 00:30

Basically you argument is this:

Our methods are right, yours are wrong.
This was our demo, not yours.

Well that's boarderline arrogant, as much as I fundamentally disagree with truthers, I thought we had some common ground...... Not no more.

Jesus


The power of the people, and the weak and feeble troll.

22.09.2010 00:50

"Well from what I can see, the only people REALLY getting benefit out of the war on terror are the protestors. Gravy train, something to shout about and no responsibility or aim to do anything else to stop the problem. Perfect."

There is no war on terror, it died a miserable flea-bitten death two years ago. The Whitehouse is no longer using the term and neither are any of the coalition partners. Such is the power of the very protesters you claim haven't done anything to 'fix the problem', the so-called 'war on terror' led directly to the financial crisis and the collapse of international financial markets which the entire world is now brought low by.

So the so-called 'war on terror' is also responsible for the hardships that many now face along with the monstrous loss of life that even the 'terrorists' could never match.

Nobody gains from the so-called 'war on terror'.

Absolutely everybody is a loser.

The only people who argue in favour of the so-called 'war on terror', are those who take pleasure in the suffering of others.

Those are the people we should really be at war with. Those are the people we should be burying.

But I see that the Indymedia troll is 'at it' again trying to prevent 'the message' from travelling.

So let's give it a good old push.

What the original story illustrates is that quiet, thoughtful, non-confrontational, active, gentle and inclusive engagement with those involved with those who are prosecuting this war are best engaged in a civilised manner and given an opportunity to voice their real opinions, which, all to often, are racked with guilt and a profound sense of unease over what they are being asked to do.

It is very important to give them space to be able to breath. If they are able to breath, the lungs of war are sucked empty and the war 'profiteers' collapse into a lifeless heap.

Its easy for antiwar groups under the control of dubious 'Labour-aligned' factions to organise people into roudy mobs that rant and shout but what does this really achieve?

Does it do anything to divide those prosecuting this war, or does it simply unite them under the banner of mutual distaste of being collectively villified by the mob?

The war machine thrives on the unity of those it has co-opted to grease its cogs. Without that unity, it seizes up and its parts melt together and stop functioning.

You can't bully people into doing the right thing, but you can ask them nicely.

Troll raping.


Resistance

22.09.2010 09:58

"You can't bully people into doing the right thing, but you can ask them nicely."

Well I completely disagree, however, I have no problem with you having this ethos, or using this methodology, way I see it is you'll come to find out yourself how thouroughly ineffective this is. I didn't think you could bully oppressors, I would call it fighting back, or in the least not taking it and resisting. I think that is a courageous and beautiful thing - but that is just my opnion.

I would like to bring your attention to the long running protest against EDO/MBM in Brighton:

 http://www.smashedo.org.uk/pressreleases/06-07-18.htm

Which has been losing money and staff because of the campaign:

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/07/434285.html.

Confront


Most protesters were not there to discuss 9/11

23.09.2010 12:33

The last photo shown is misleading in this context, as the people in it were not generally there to protest about the 9/11 attacks, or make any claims about who was responsible for them. We were there to protest against the arms, 'defence' and 'security' industries. It wasn't part of any londontruthaction.

The protest was promoted by Disarm DSEi:  http://www.dsei.org/confront-counter-terror

There's another set of photos by AlexMilanTracy:  http://www.demotix.com/news/301382/protest-counter-terror-expo-london

We were making claims that the threat of (non state) terrorism has been blown out of all proportion to suit state and corporate interests.

Graham


Graham

23.09.2010 12:51

Not misleading to anyone who actually read the article...

"After a few hours (and a little too late, as the queue had died down considerably) a group of anti-arms protesters turned up"

wtc7.net