no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics

My Country Went to War on Terror and All I Got Was this Lousy Police State

September 30th, 2011

Exactly two years ago yesterday I wrote that the threat of terrorism is essentially non-existent. This is not because the Alphabet Soup Agencies are doing a spectacular job keeping us safe, it’s because even despite all the Imperial meddling around the globe, there just aren’t very many would-be terrorists. If the terror threat was credible, we couldn’t stop it.

Not much has changed since then. In fact, there are so few actual terrorist threats (probably because there are so few actual terrorists) that the FBI has to manufacture its own terror plots, and then take credit for saving the day.

Let’s put things in perspective.

You are eight times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist attack


The Terrorists are Still Winning

September 13th, 2010

I don’t do the 9/11 anniversary post. Billy Beck sums up my feelings about it pretty nicely or there’s Thoreau’s self-described “tasteless” pull-no-punches memo, in which he congratulates the winners, a list including GW Bush, the CIA, the military-industrial complex, Al-Qaeda, etc.

OK. I kindasorta did one a few years ago the crux of which was: We’re all less safe, as long as the Empire is bent on exporting its democracy, its inflation, its violence.  So, let’s stop using 9/11 to rationalize all sorts of horrible policy which is really the hallmark of terrorist victory.

Now when I say the terrorists won, it’s not necessarily or exclusively the Al-Qaeda.  Remember, there are plenty of terrorists at work within the US government, too. And their machinations are that much worse, because what they do, few people notice. And of those, fewer recognize as acts of terrorism.

The entire official line is a lie. I’m not talking about “There were no bodies at the crash site of flight 93” or “It was a missile that hit the Pentagon” conspiracy-theory crap. I’m talking about the “official” version of the truth, basically a series of lies by omission spanning decades, at least back as far as the end of WWI.

William Blum’s Anti-Empire Report for September 1, 2010 challenges the official line:

[E]ven if one accepts the official government version of 19 Muslims hijacking four airliners — the question remains: Why did they choose the targets they chose? If they wanted to kill lots of American infidels why not fly the planes into the stands of packed football or baseball stadiums in the midwest or the south? Certainly a lot less protected than the Pentagon or the financial center of downtown Manhattan. Why did they choose symbols of US military might and imperialism?

[9/11] was not a religious act, it was a political act. It was revenge for decades of American political and military abuse in the Middle East.

If you’re willing to ignore a century of meddling in the Arab world, pesky details like those are easy to sweep aside.


August 24th, 2010

Al-Qaeda is a nasty, brutish, criminal organization which has killed a lot of innocent people.

war is terrorism with a bigger budget
What about American foreign policy (i.e., bombs not diplomacy), which in recent history has killed several orders of magnitude more people, a not insignificant proportion of whom have been innocent.

In May 2009, in a testimony to US Congress, US Advisor to Gen. David Kilmulllen, asked the Obama Administration to call off the drone attacks stating, “We have been able to kill only 14 senior Al Qaeda leaders since 2006 and in the same period, killed over 700 Pakistani civilians.”

Pakistan’s Drone Dilemma

There is absolutely no positive way you can spin a failure rate like that.  So they don’t even try.  The interested individual can find these stories online,but he has to go searching for them.  The news outlets bury the stories if they report them at all, because they are subservient to the State.

In the most recent installment where 20 people were killed, the death toll includes 4 women and 3 children.  Guess they just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, right?  The headlines tend to emphasize that 13 militants were killed, but let’s be real, here: 13 suspected militants,were summarily executed by an unmanned drone so that their accusers never had to present evidence in a court of law.

According to Reuters, “US officials say the drones are a highly effective weapon against militant groups. But civilian casualties in the strikes have angered Pakistanis,” but this “highly effective weapon” hasn’t really gotten any high profile terrorists since Baitulla Mehsud (a year ago), and has an alarming propensity to kill indiscriminately, most reports indicating that between 30 and 40% of those killed in drone strikes are objectively non-combatants.

no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics