What the "war on terrorism" is really about

Peter Symon

The "war on terrorism", unlike previous wars, is not against any 
particular nation but against a shadow — terrorism. It is being 
used, however, against many nations as is seen in the invasion of 
Afghanistan and Iraq although not a skerrick of evidence has been 
brought forward to show that citizens from either of these two 
countries had any connection to the destruction of the World 
Trade Centre Towers on 9/11.

The "war on terrorism" is now being used to threaten Syria, Iran, 
the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and others with pre-
emptive strikes.

It is also the excuse used to justify the widespread restriction 
of democratic rights that has taken place in the US, Australia, 
Britain, Spain and a number of other countries that have joined 
the "war".

To keep it going and to keep the people ratcheted up with fear 
and concern, it is necessary to have a constant stream of shadowy 
threats and the occasional actual act of terrorism.

There has been a constant stream of alleged dangers and over the 
Christmas-New Year period. The United States was put on high 
alert although nothing eventuated. Recall the alleged danger from 
the spread of anthrax.

Under cover of such threats, the US was further militarised and 
democratic rights curtailed under the so-called Patriot Act. 
Armed troops patrol the streets in force. Armed "air marshals" 
are being put on aircraft and demands placed on other countries 
that they must do the same if they are to fly into the US. Many 
other similar measures were implemented, including in Australia. 
Sydney's New Year fireworks display was also considered to be an 
opportunity for some terrorist act.

"Terrorism" was the excuse given for the inhumane and criminal 
incarceration of people at Camp X-ray in Guantanamo, for giving 
ASIO police state powers, and for many other similar acts in 
Europe, the US and elsewhere.

When anything happens it is always immediately asserted that al-
Qaida or some organisation with an Islamic sounding name is 
responsible.

It is necessary to recall that al-Qaida is an organisation that 
was originally created and financed by the US to fight against 
the Soviet military assistance extended to the then government of 
Afghanistan.

It has been revealed that the organisation said to have been 
responsible for the recent bombings in Turkey was created and 
used by the Turkish Government to fight the Kurdish Workers Party 
(PKK). The bombings in Turkey came at a sensitive time — when 
the Turkish parliament was under pressure to provide Turkish 
troops to help the US out in Iraq.

What shadowy figures behind the scenes financed, armed and 
commanded those who did the actual bombings?

Have some of these organisations been deliberately used to 
provide justification for the invasions and wars that were 
already planned?

There is now plenty of evidence that the invasions of Afghanistan 
and Iraq were planned by the clique now in power in Washington 
long before the destruction of the World Tower Centre (WTC).

Consider the timing. To justify the invasion of Afghanistan and 
Iraq which were of high strategic and economic importance to the 
US, a large scale provocation was necessary if the people of the 
US and other countries were to be persuaded that it was 
justified.

The destruction of the WTC and the attack on the Pentagon 
provided the justification although not a single one of the 
alleged participants in the WTC bombings came from either 
Afghanistan or Iraq.

Most of the American people, overwhelmed by the media hype 
following the atrocity, could not distinguish between Afghanistan 
and Iraq on the one hand and Saudi Arabia and Egypt from which 
the pilots actually came.

Nor could they suspect that their own leaders were complicit in 
the atrocity. At least US leaders knew that it was about to take 
place and did nothing to stop it.

There has never been an investigation into the actions of 
President Bush on the day the destruction of the WTC took place 
or of the Air Force commander who was responsible for the air 
protection of Washington and the Pentagon and who did not act to 
put the designated fighter jets into the sky to intercept the 
high-jacked planes. 

His name is Richard Myers. He was Acting Head of the US Joint 
Chiefs of Staff at the time. No doubt, for being one of those in 
the know about September 11, he has been promoted to US Chief of 
Staff. He recently visited Australia in that capacity.

It is important to ask the question: Who benefits?

And if terrorism is to be looked at objectively, it is clear that 
the objectives pursued by the US gangsters in power in the White 
House are being served by the terrorist acts that have taken 
place.

The powers that be are well aware that the people will quickly 
tire of the charade so it has to be beefed up continuously by a 
steady stream of alleged threats and the occasional incident to 
make it all look real.

With elections in the United States and most likely Australia 
this year, it would not come as a surprise if there were some 
significant incident to stampede the people into voting the Bush 
and Howard Governments back into office. This would enable them 
proceed with the real wars that they have in mind towards their 
shared objective of US imperialist world domination.