. 3
( 42 .)


ensuring the instal-lation of a new government that would be sufficiently amenable to
Washington's international objectives, including the siting of bases and electronic
communications intercept stations and the running of oil and gas pipelines through the
country from the Caspian Sea region.

The welfare of the people of Afghanistan, by contrast, can have counted for little,
considering that the elements put in power by US military might are largely those whose
earlier rule before the Taliban was so depraved that many Afghans welcomed the
accession of the Taliban to power; their newest atrocities, carried out under cover of
American firepower, show they haven't lost their touch. The prime minister of the interim
government, Hamid Karzai, though himself not seeming too villainous, may have a
credibility problem, given his long close contact with the US State Department, National

Council, Congress, and other pillars of the American foreign policy establishment.16 Yet
the connection may work only one way, for when leaders of the interim government
asked the United States to halt its bombing in December because of the frequent deaths of
innocent people, Washington refused, saying it had its own timeline. This does not bode
well for the future Afghan government and society; neither does Karzai's appointment of
General Rashid Dostum as deputy defense minister, a man amongst whose charms is the
habit of punishing his soldiers by tying them to tank tracks and then driving the tanks
around his barracks' square to turn them into mincemeat.17

Terrorist scares

In the Introduction which follows, written in 1999, the point is made that the specter of
dangerous and threatening enemies of one kind or another has been highly exaggerated
for decades in order to intimidate the American public into accepting the national security
state, that was all the while being molded, and to persuade the citizenry to surrender their
power to the authorities who can save them from what they have been manipulated into
fearing. The national security state, with its accompanying immense budgets, multiple
benefits for its managers, and justification for increased police powers to keep the
doubters in line is a state of affairs much desired by the elites.

In light of what happened on September 11, 2001 it may appear to some that the threat
was not in fact exaggerated, but rather very real. But the Introduction to this book does
not imply that there will never be a major attack on the United States for which a certain
level of military and other preparedness is necessary. Given the constant belligerence and
destructiveness of US foreign policy, retaliation has to be expected, at one time or
another, somewhere.

For close on fifty years the imminent threat of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe or
nuclear attack upon the United States was drummed into the American consciousness.
Nothing of the sort ever happened, of course. Nothing of the sort was ever seriously
contemplated by the Soviets, for obvious reasons of self-preservation. Then, with the
demise of the Soviet Union, multiple new "enemy" countries were found, along with the
drug threat and the terrorist threat. The very occasional terrorist attacks on the United
States, almost always abroad and in response to Washington's policies, were used to fan
fears and expand budgets. The attack of September does not justify more than fifty years
of lies. Indeed, what has taken place in the United States since the attack lends great
credence to the proposition that the purpose of all the fear-mongering was what its critics
always charged”in fact, understated.
After the attack it was Christmas every day for the national security establishment and its
corporate cohorts. All their wish lists were fulfilled, and then some. In short order, they
massively increased defense spending; shamelessly stifled social spending; pro-moted
obscenely extensive tax breaks for the largest corporations; greatly increased surveillance
and prosecutory powers over the citi-zenry, including license to enter their homes
virtually at will, to an extent a dictatorship might envy; tore up the Bill of Rights for non-
citizens, including legal residents; created a new Office of Homeland Security; launched
efforts to cut back on environmental legislation; unilaterally abrogated a leading arms
control treaty; announced plans to expand the American Empire, under the rubric of an
"anti-terrorism crusade", to Iraq, Somalia, North Korea, and Sudan, amongst others; and
a great deal more.

Many critics of the bombing campaign, who were in vulnerable positions, suffered
consequences: a number of university teachers who had spoken out against the war lost
their positions or were publicly rebuked by school officials, high-school students were
suspended for the same reason, the only member of Congress who voted against the
"Authorization for Use of Military Force" received innumerable threats and hate mail;
and so it went.

The fruit of the foregoing is a police state, not the worst police state in the world to be
sure, but a police state nonetheless; the War on Drugs had made it such even before
September 11.

One of the prime motivations behind this assault on civil liberties is very likely the elite's
deep-seated desire to rid themselves of the scourge of the anti-globalization movement.
In the new anti-terrorism law (the "USA PATRIOT Act")”rushed through the legislative
process before almost any member of Congress could even read the lengthy text”acts
that appear to be intended "to intimidate or coerce a civilian population" or "influence the
policy of a government by intimidation or coercion" can be categorized as "terrorism";
with great danger not only to the individual arrested, but also to his or her group and to
those who have contributed to the group. All will be under serious threat of having their
worldly assets confiscated, at a minimum.

How many young people are going to put their future at such great risk? How many
organizations are going to risk losing everything?

Who knew what when?

Unsurprisingly, numerous reports have surfaced since September 11 which raise
questions about the official version of events; reports concerning the CIA meeting with
Osama bin Laden in July 2001 in a Dubai hospital; Israel's Mossad being behind it all or
at least having had intelligence about the attacks in advance and not sharing it, so that
Americans could see what Israel goes through with terrorists; the failure of air safety and
air defense systems to carry out long-standing, well-practiced, routine procedures and
shoot down the second and third planes, perhaps deliberately choosing not to do so;
substantial insider trading shortly before the attacks based on the expectation that the
stocks of American and United Airlines would plunge along with their planes; US covert
meetings with and support of the Taliban for years; the ties between the Bush family and
the bin Ladens; and much more.18 There's enough there to feed researchers and
publishers for years to come. But it is beyond the capacity of this essay to explore the
questions raised in anything approaching the depth some of them deserve.

I can only add my own speculative analysis to the already weighty pile. It strains
credulity to believe that the FBI, CIA, NSA, et al. were unaware, at least in some detail,
that a significant terrorist operation in the United States was in the offing; and as wild as
that operation turned out to be, its nature could not have been unthinkable by these
agencies, for in February 2000, in Israel, at the First International Conference on Defense
Against Suicide Attacks, the CIA had received specific warnings that terrorists were
planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols in
the United States.19 Moreover, a terrorist arrested in the Philippines in 1995 revealed his
group's plan to hijack small planes, fill them with explosives, and crash them into the
CIA and other US government targets.20

Two or three of the hijackers were on an FBI watch list. According to FBI sources, in
virtually every case in which the FBI has prevented a terrorist attack, success depended
on long-term investigations, whose hallmarks were patience and letting terrorist plots go
forward. "You obviously want to play things out so you can fully identify the breadth and
scope of the conspiracy. Obviously, the most efficient and effective way to do that is to
bring it down to the last stage."21

They may have waited one stage too long.

Although there's very little that one should rule out as being morally beyond the
American powers-that-be, I don't think they would have allowed what happened to
happen if they had known exactly what and when it was going to be. Certainly, the
Pentagon would not have permitted its own home and personnel to be so savagely
violated. It remains inevitable, however, that the fact of so much of the elites' wish lists
being fulfilled in the wake of September 11 is guaranteed to fuel further conspiracy

Is this any way to end terrorism?

The American bombing of Afghanistan may well turn out to be a political train wreck.
Can it be doubted that thousands throughout the Muslim world were emotionally and
spiritually recruited to the cause of the next Osama bin Laden by the awful ruination?
That is to say, the next generation of terrorists. Indeed, in December, while the American
bombs were still falling on Afghanistan, a man”British citizen Richard Reid, who was a
convert to Islam”tried to blow up an American Airlines plane en route to the United
States with explosives hidden in his shoes. At the London mosque that Reid had attended,
the cleric in charge warned that extremists were enlisting other young men like Reid and
that agents aligned with radical Muslim figures had stepped up recruiting efforts since
September 11. The cleric said that he knew of "hundreds of Richard Reids" recruited in
Britain. Reid, described in the press as a "drifter", reportedly traveled to Israel, Egypt, the
Netherlands, and Belgium before arriving in Paris and boarding the American Airlines
plane.22 This raises the question of who was financing him. It seems that the recent
freezing of numerous bank accounts of alleged terrorist groups throughout the world by
the United States may have rather limited effect.

Americans do not feel any more secure in their places of work, in their places of leisure,
or in their travels than they did the day before their government's bombings began.

Has the power elite learned anything? Here's James Woolsey, former director of the CIA,
speaking in December in Washington, advocating an invasion of Iraq and unconcerned
about the response of the Arab world: the silence of the Arab public in the wake of
America's victories in Afghanistan, he said, proves that "only fear will re-establish
respect for the U.S."23

What, then, can the United States do to end terrorism directed against it? The answer lies
in removing the anti-American motiva-tions of the terrorists. To achieve this, American
foreign policy will have to undergo a profound metamorphosis, as the contents of this
book testify.

If I were the president, I could stop terrorist attacks against the United States in a few
days. Permanently. I would first apologize to all the widows and orphans, the tortured
and impoverished, and all the many millions of other victims of American imperialism.
Then I would announce, in all sincerity, to every corner of the world, that America's
global interventions have come to an end, and inform Israel that it is no longer the 51st
state of the USA but henceforth”oddly enough”a foreign country. I would then reduce
the military budget by at least 90% and use the savings to pay reparations to the victims.
There would be more than enough money. One year's military budget of $330 billion is
equal to more than $18,000 an hour for every hour since Jesus Christ was born.

That's what I'd do on my first three days in the White House. On the fourth day, I'd be

Washington, DC, January 2002


1 Guardian (London), December 19, 2001, article by Duncan Campbell

2 US Department of Defense, Defense Science Board, The Defense Science
Board 1997 Summer Study Task Force on DOD Responses to Transnational
Threats, October 1997, Final Report, Vol. 1, can be found in full at
http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/trans.pdf. The part quoted is on page 15 of the
report (page 31 of the pdf online version)

3 New York Times, March 26,1989, p. 16
4 Jim Dwyer et al., Two Seconds Under the World (New York, 1994), p.196

5 Marc W. Herold, "A Dossier on Civilian Victims of United States'
Aerial Bombing of Afghanistan: A Comprehensive Accounting", at:

6 David Rose, "Attackers did not know they were to die", Observer (London)
October 14, 2001

7 Washington Post, October 2,1999

8 First quote: Guardian (London), December 20, 2001, p. 16; second quote:
US Defense Department briefing, November 1, 2001

9 New York Times, October 28, 2001, p.Bl

10 Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 31, 2001, p. 10A

11 Fox network: "Special Report with Brit Hume", November 5, 2001

12 Washington Post, November 12, 2001, p.Cl

13 Miami Herald, September 12, 2001, p.23

14 The Der Spiegel interview was translated by Jost Lang and can be found
in full at the Emperors Clothes website: http://emperors-clodies.com/docs/

15 Washington Post, December 26, 2001, p.16

16 Ibid., December 22, 2001, p.16

17 Independent (London), November 14, 2001, article by Robert Fisk

18 See, for example: Emperor's Clothes website at http://emperors-clothes.com
and http://www.copvcia.com

19 Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Frankfurt, Germany), September 14, 2001

20 Washington Post Magazine, December 30, 2001, p.27. The terrorist was part
of a group which had already planted a bomb aboard a Philippine Airlines
flight; the bomb exploded, killing one passenger and forcing the plane to
make an emergency landing

21 Washington Post, November 28, 2001, p.14
22 The Times (London), December 27, 2001, p.l; Washington Post, December

23 Washington Post, December 27, 2001, p.C2

This book could be entitled Serial Chain-Saw Baby Killers and the Women Who Love

The women don't really believe that their beloved would do such a thing, even if they're
shown a severed limb or a headless torso. Or if they believe it, they know down to their
bone marrow that lover-boy really had the best of intentions; it must have been some kind
of very unfortunate accident, a well-meaning blunder; in fact, even more likely, it was a
humanitarian act.

For 70 years, the United States convinced much of the world that there was an
international conspiracy out there. An International Communist Conspiracy, seeking no
less than control over the entire planet, for purposes which had no socially redeeming
values. And the world was made to believe that it somehow needed the United States to
save it from communist darkness. "Just buy our weapons," said Washington, "let our
military and our corporations roam freely across your land, and give us veto power over
who your leaders will be, and we'll protect you."

It was the cleverest protection racket since men convinced women that they needed men
to protect them”if all the men vanished overnight, how many women would be afraid to
walk the streets?

And if the people of any foreign land were benighted enough to not realize that they
needed to be saved, if they failed to appreciate the underlying nobility of American
motives, they were warned that they would burn in Communist Hell. Or a CIA facsimile
thereof. And they would be saved nonetheless.

A decade after the fall of the Berlin Wall, America is still saving countries and peoples
from one danger or another. The scorecard reads as follows: From 1945 to the end of the


. 3
( 42 .)