Home-grown Terrorists:

 When do we ask the Hard Questions?

by
Frank A. Jones
___________________

The terrorist bombings that occurred in London a week ago represent a logical extension of terrorism, that is home-grown. Terrorists have organized and are now activating the weapon of terrorism by citizens of the specific country they live in. The London terrorists were not sinister characters from abroad, but people who were citizens of that country and lived quietly among the population.

This new front of terrorism raises more problems for the citizens of the UK and the US. Not only must the citizenry be aware or worried about terrorist explosions and mayhem, now it must face ever-increasing surveillance by its own government as a form of protection. And in societies such as the UK, the US, and democratic societies increased scrutiny is repugnant and antithetical to the very nature of a free society. 

Since September 11, 2001, the US has had increased surveillance on its citizenry through legislation hastily drafted and called the Patriot Act. It was enacted to "protect" the citizenry and the national integrity. The Patriot Act authorized the government to investigate reading habits; books checked out of the library; it allows surveillance of individuals' use of the internet, what associations, clubs, etc., a citizen is involved in, and more.

These intrusions into US citizens' private behavior and thinking  pose great problems to the viability of a democratic society, unless a government is very careful in the use of such powers. But will it? This society is made up of men/women from polarized sectors of society that may not be careful with those powers. 

The Bush Administration is one of the most ideological bent administrations this nation has seen since Nixon, and they are hardly reasonable and practical people. Ideologues are ideology and belief cops who religiously patrol the thoughts and words of others to make sure they comport with the polemics of their own ideology.

Whereas this situation poses problems, there are more pressing problems still. Since 9-11, the US and the UK have offered this explanation for why the terrorists attacked us: "They did this to us because they hate our freedom, our riches, our way of life."  This simplistic explanation to terrorism, articulated by President George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Tony Blair, has been successfully used as Bush's Theory of Everything. But this explanation makes little sense and may be the real problem that must be tackled; it indicates that the US is self-deceived and has failed to see itself in the world through other eyes; it also indicates an unwillingness to actually look at terrorism and its causes. Instead of looking at the causes, we look at ourselves and see some sort of comic book super hero type, saying repeatedly: "We are the sole superpower in the world." And many Americans think that such attitudes and self-perceptions are sufficient to defeat terrorism--terrorism must be combated militarily! But that is shortsightedness. 

We cannot honestly or prudently assess the world through this self-serving narrative--we are the only super power; our situation is more complex than comic book characters. Reason this logically: if one hates rhubarb pie, it does not logically follow that he will attempt to kill all rhubarb plants. Yet this is Bush's synopsized explanation for why terrorists attacked us, and like too many other things that he says, is accepted as true by far too many. If the terrorists hate America for all the reasons President Bush listed, a logical reaction to that hatred would be to stay away, which can easily be done. Why spend good money and human lives when all one need do is stay away? 

When this nation's leaders offer such mindless reasoning, as, "They did this to us because they hate our freedom, our riches, our way of life."  we reveal our blindness and our unwillingness to see the causative factors of terrorism. When we look at what generates terrorism we see ourselves as a part of the many factors that cause it. 

As a rule, great nations exercise careful thought and deliberations about their actions, their position and place in the world, what behaviors they engage in and the ramifications of those behaviors on the various people.  Internationally powerful nations also realize that their sneezes may cause a cold  in smaller nations and their people. They are careful at each step they take, lest their steps bring  responses contrary to the people's interests and their interests. 

This is the way great nations behave, but, contrary to our old-men warlords who have been guiding us into wars they don't fight, military might does not make a great nation; nor does financial power make a great nation. In sum, a nation is great when that nation exercises prudent sensibilities in the context of its impact on the affairs of the various environments it inhabits.

This does not seem to be the way of the USA; in our super hero machinations of mythologized characterizations, we glorify our military and financial might, and do not realize that military diplomacy is the way of mental wimps. Consequently, our present behavior indicates that we are a nation that will not long endure in its present position of lone super-power.

In the face of a new type of war, America needs to ask profound questions about its behavior, why are we  being responded to so adversely. We already know the causes of terrorism itself. We should not allow ourselves the luxury of  a superficial, feel-good panacea offered by this administration. 

The UK's bombings show that terrorists live within its own borders and need not be imported from afar. But more than that, they show the same horrifying reality--individuals are freely giving up their lives to kills others  as some type of statement that both the US and the UK won't examine.

Will we never ask the obvious questions? What would make a person give up his life to kill others? Isn't it really superficial to assume and say that they are just fanatics and that is all to it? What is the horrific statement these bombers and their leadership are trying to make? The Bin Laden, et. al., tapes articulate some message, and though it is confused, it is a message we need to decipher. 

When the Uni-bomber terrorized America, we tried to see what his message was. But with nefarious plotters and planers who pose a much greater threat, we have not attempted to determine their grievances. Instead, the US  has imagined a cause for their hatred and militarily gone after them to kill them. Bin Labin's messages and their actions indicate some serious, unresolved issue is present and cannot be overlooked through our obfuscation. There must be some grave cause for terrorists actions, and it does this nation or any people a disservice to say they hate us because of our freedoms.... We must ask what is the cause of this specific terrorism pointed at us; we already know what breeds terrorism, yet we carry on our charade of addressing it militarily.

John Yoo of UC Law School, and a former Bush staffer, wrote an article in yesterday's local newspaper about becoming offensive with terrorism. His ideas, however, were the same warmed-over conservative ideas that this administration is working under--using military power. But John Yoo went to the extreme of suggesting that laws be passed against fundamental Islam. Of course, such a notion would necessitate laws against all fundamental religions, and that will never stand constitutional muster. His ideas about fighting terrorism aggressively and offensively are the same as this administration's. And both his ideas and notions are silly and offer neither heat nor light to this discussion. But, since he is little more than a Bush spokesman still, his words offer an espial into the Bush administration's mental naiveté.

It is worth noting that in none of the terrorists' tapes is there any reference to our freedoms, our riches, or our way of life. Those notions are our own assumptions and they are  self-serving concoctions. But there is reference to our behavior in the Middle East and throughout the world.

It is important that we not only safeguard ourselves from their attacks but that we also discover what, precisely, are their core issues and contentions with us and address them as much as is reasonably, financially, socially, and politically possible. Since we are all over the world, we need to start addressing those factors that fuel terrorism. To merely safeguard ourselves from an enemy willing to die to kill us and not understand his objectives is a willingness to  fight blindly and bankrupt this nation. If that is not clear to this  administration, it is surely clear to terrorists. 

Presently, the US has spent $313 billion fighting in Iraq (an unnecessary war that George Bush took this nation into) and in Afghanistan. Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office projects additional expenses of  $450 billion in the next 10-years. This almost trillion dollar Bush war has killed 1,763 US soldiers, wounded at least 13-15,000, will cause Post Traumatic Stress Disorder on an estimated 120,000 US soldiers that must be treated, and has killed and wounded hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, about which one of this administration's spokesperson said, "They don't count."

We know that terrorist acts represent a state of war; in war, as a part of the war strategy, we should try to see and understand the opponent's objectives. Why is there no US strategy fashioned to capture that information? To fight on faulty assumptions is to fight ignorantly and to fail. 

With the money we have placed in our war machines and killing tools in this effort alone, we could transform the world, educate infant would-be terrorists into productive citizens with no claim against us. But our leaders are content to kill terrorists and defeat terrorism by military means because they hate our riches, our freedom, our way of life. Could there be some other reasons? Could it be that we have seriously grieved and are continuing to grieve the world by our actions among them? Could it be that the roots of terrorism could be rooted out through a correction of our behavior in the world? 

Look at America's gross blindness in this war: O sama Bin Laden, et. al., attacked us, and we went to Afghanistan after him, but then US forces were diverted from that effort to Iraq* to fight an unprovoked George Bush war that has roots in some sort of Senior Bush/ Junior Bush psychology complex that is complicated by a Religious Right confluence. And this unlawful war has already cost this nation over $313 billion and will cost almost a trillion dollars. 

And when George Bush has gone out of office, when the fog of war has passed, there may well be many legitimate lawsuits by Iraqis against the US government for needless loss of life, destruction of property of innocent Iraqis, whose only offense was to be alive in that part of the world when the US decided to invade for no just cause recognized by any international law. This war will cost this nation more dearly than Americans now realize, yet there is no traction on any initiative to impeach Bush.

No nation can win a war led by leaders who are willingly blinded by ideology and cannot see reality. To win a war, the enemy and his objectives must be known; the foundational basis for the enemy's cause must be under-minded by defeating him on the ground and in his contentions against us. That requires correct ideology matched with correct behavior. A nation must also see itself honestly. That is why, if we are going to win this war on terror, we must ask serious questions about the enemy, his objectives, our behavior in the part of the world that effects him, and how we can stop this war before the nation is exhausted financially, militarily, morally, and socially. 

Frank A. Jones 
7/18/05

______
* Iraq had no connections with O' sama Bin Laden or terrorists at all, in spite of what Vice President Dick Cheney kept saying--to keep repeating a lie will not transform it into a truth. The war on terrorism has become a catch-all phrase that allows Bush and his administration to do whatever they fancy. They have lied to the American people right, left, in front, back, and center on Iraq and many more things. 

They literally scared the American people on every turn about Iraq: " Iraq has WMD's and we know where they are...Iraq could attack us within 45-minutes...Iraq has connection with O Sama Bin Laden and other terrorists, etc. [A composite of President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of Defense/war Rumsfeld's lies]. 

Home