|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
The politics of the latest terror scare
By Barry Grey
15 August 2006
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
Five days after UK authorities arrested 24 British-born Muslims
and announced that they and their American counterparts had thwarted
a plot to blow up trans-Atlantic flights from London to the US,
neither the British nor the American government has produced any
facts to substantiate their dire claims.
No details of the supposed plot have been provided, and no
hard evidence that would justify the arrest of so many people
or the imposition of chilling security measures that had wreaked
havoc at airports in the US and Britain.
In the meantime, commercial flights are being turned around
in mid-flight, and wild claims of new plots are hitting the newsstands.
The latest was the arrest of three Palestinian-Americans who were
hauled into jail in Michigan after they purchased some 80 cell
phones from a Wal-Mart store. Local police discovered that one
of them had a digital camera with an image of the Mackinac Bridge,
which connects Michigans upper and lower peninsulas. This
was sufficient to charge them with conspiring, using cell phones
as detonators, to attack the bridge.
This implausible plot was punctured on Monday when
the FBI issued a statement that none of the three were connected
to any known terrorist groups, that buying cell phones was not
a crime, and that the Mackinac Bridge was in no danger. Family
members explained that the three bought and sold cell phones to
make a living. The incident was, however, indicative of the atmosphere
of hysteria that is being encouraged by the Bush administration.
(As of this writing, moreover, the three suspects remain in jail).
Unless and until hard facts are presented, the entire airline
terror plot must be viewed with the gravest suspicion.
On NBC TVs Today program Monday morning,
Lisa Myers, reporting from London, said British authorities were
complaining that they had less evidence than they wanted against
the alleged plotters because the Bush administration insisted
that the timing of the arrests be brought forward by a week. The
British, according to Myers, had planned to wait until the supposed
conspirators carried out a dry run of their plot.
That British officials are privately expressing concerns about
a lack of evidence raises serious questions as to whether there
are clear and convincing facts that those arrested had anything
to do with the alleged plot, or that such a conspiracy existed.
Myers revelation reinforces previous reports that the
British government had objected to claims by US officials that
the alleged plot was linked to Al Qaeda. These developments suggest
that far from thwarting a nefarious plot on the eve of its implementation,
the British government came under pressure from Washington to
participate in a massive provocation, and that once more it knuckled
under to US demands.
The lack of facts has not prevented the mainstream media, especially
in the US, from uncritically accepting the official claims and
embellishing them with commentaries by terrorist experts
about Al Qaeda connections, home-grown terrorist cells and similar
hypotheses, all of which are calculated to create a climate of
fear and intimidation.
Nevertheless, buried in the reams of newspaper articles and
hours of television commentary are bits and pieces of information
that cast further doubt on the substantiality of the official
claims. Thus Mondays USA Today, in an article
headlined Fearing Wider US Plot, Investigators Raced Clock,
noted the following: There was also no immediate evidence
that any of the suspects had purchased tickets for future flights,
although British authorities have indicated some of the suspects
had allegedly reviewed flight schedules and were honing in on
specific flights.
Yet British and American officials stated at the time of the
arrests last week that the airline attack was imminent.
To make the entire affair more suspect, the NBC news program
Monday evening reported that British authorities had discovered
new evidence that led them to alter their approach
to their ongoing investigation. What was this new evidence?
And how could it significantly alter an investigation that had
supposedly thwarted an imminent attack? These questions were not
even raised.
Despite the lack of factual substantiation, official threat
levels have been raised and so-called security measures have been
introduced that have created chaos in the air transport system
and subjected the American and British people to police-military
methods that violate their privacy and infringe on their democratic
rights.
Twenty-three British citizens remain in jail, under conditions,
according to their lawyers, that make a mockery of due process
and democratic rights. They have been denied contact with family
members, have had virtually no contact with legal counsel, and
are being subjected to abusive treatment, including confinement
in freezing cells. They have been charged with no crimes, and,
under recently passed British anti-terror laws, can be held without
charge for up to 28 days.
The names and photos of most of the prisoners have been splashed
across newspapers and their assets have been seized by the British
Treasury, proving that the presumption of innocence is a dead
letter in both Britain and the US.
These are the type of conditions that police agencies employ
to terrorize suspects and extract damaging statements or confessions
that are then cited to prove state allegations and
prosecute defendants.
One thing is clear: the supposed plot has been seized on for
transparently political purposes of a deeply reactionary character.
On Monday, British Home Minister John Reid announced that the
official threat level in Britain had been lowered from critical
to severe, even as he suggested that there were many
terrorist cells operating in Britain and revived the Labour governments
call for an extension of preventive detention to 90 days.
The day before, the US homeland security secretary, Michael
Chertoff, made the rounds of Sunday talk shows and called for
changes in US laws to make government spying even more pervasive
and allow for preventive detention along British lines.
Why was the Bush administration so insistent that the alleged
plot be exposed last Thursday? The answer has nothing to do with
security considerations. It has, rather, to do with the machinations
of the clique of political gangstersDick Cheney, Karl Rove,
among otherswho run the US government.
With their favorite Democrat, the rabidly pro-war senator and
former vice presidential candidate, Joseph Lieberman, losing the
Democratic primary in Connecticut to a political upstart running
as an opponent of the Iraq war, Ned Lamont, it was urgent that
this expression of mass antiwar and anti-Bush sentiment be shoved
off the front pages and supplanted by a new round of fear-mongering
and hysteria.
Likewise the revelations of US war crimes in Iraq and the torture
of US prisoners at Guantánamo.
Even as Cheney was in discussions with the government of British
Prime Minister Tony Blair over the impending terror scare, he
held a rare press briefing to denounce the vote for Lamont as
a boon to Al Qaeda. This bit of witch-hunting was then taken up
by Lieberman himself, who slandered opposition to the Iraq war
and to himself as tantamount to support for terrorism.
There undeniably is a conspiracy. It is a plot to use terrorist
threats, real or imagined, to terrorize the American people, intimidate
them, disorient them, and accustom them to accept the militarization
of every aspect of their lives and the destruction of their democratic
rights. The center of this conspiracy is the American government
itself.
This is to be, in so far as Cheney and company have a say in
the matter, the atmosphere in which the November elections are
held.
What is the political context in which this latest terror scare
takes place? Iraq has descended into civil war under the jackboot
of American military occupation, Afghanistan is spiraling out
of control, the US-Israeli war in Lebanon has ended in political
failure, new opinion polls show Bushs approval ratings once
against sinking to record levels and antiwar sentiment rising
to new heights.
An article in Mondays Washington Post noted that
Republican incumbents in the Northeast fear they could be wiped
out in the November elections as a result of popular hatred for
Bush and the war.
The answer of the Cheney-Rove conspirators is to engineer a
new wave of panic and hysteria in an attempt to once again stampede
voters behind Bushs war on terrorism. They did
the same in 2004, when in the run-up to the election the government
suddenly announced a plot to attack major financial institutions
in New York, Washington and Newark, New Jerseya plot that
came to nothing. And there was, at a convenient point in the election
calendar, the sudden reemergence of Osama bin Laden with a taped
message reminding the American people that he was determined to
wipe them out.
The fascist-minded denizens of Americans secret government
rely on the cowardice and complicity of the Democratic Party and
the services of an utterly servile and corrupt media, which is
itself heavily populated by outright agents of US intelligence
agencies. Not a single mainstream newspaper or media outlet has
challenged the claims of the government regarding the alleged
airline terror plot.
What about the 24th alleged conspirator, who was quietly released
by the British authorities from jail last week? Who is he? Why
was he released? Was he perhaps the MI5 intelligence agent who
reportedly infiltrated the group of alleged plotters? These questions
are not even asked, let alone answered.
Why does the media take the government leaders in the US and
Britain at their word? They all dragged their people into a war
on the basis of lies. Bush stood before Congress, the Supreme
Court and the American people in his 2003 State of the Union Address
and lied about Iraqs supposed attempt to buy uranium from
Niger. The US secretary of state went before the United Nations
and delivered an extended brief for war that was packed with lies.
Cheney is a serial prevaricator.
As for Tony Blair, he not only lied about Iraqi weapons of
mass destruction, he secretly sanctioned a shoot-to-kill policy
that resulted in the police murder of an innocent worker, Jean
Charles de Menezes, in the aftermath of last years London
train bombings.
The most important lesson that must be drawn from the current
terror scare is just how far advanced the police state conspiracies
are in the United States, and just how criminal are the methods
of those who run the country.
See Also:
After Heathrow: What accounts for the
threat of terrorism?
[14 August 2006]
Britain's airline terror plot: Questions
that need to be answered
[11 August 2006]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |