-Caveat Lector-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4259207,00.html

The need for dissent

Voices from Britain and the US highlight the risks of a hasty response

Special report: terrorism in the US

George Monbiot
Guardian

Tuesday September 18, 2001


If Osama bin Laden did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him. For
the past four years, his name has been invoked whenever a US president has
sought to increase the defence budget or wriggle out of arms control
treaties. He has been used to justify even President Bush's missile defence
programme, though neither he nor his associates are known to possess anything
approaching ballistic missile technology. Now he has become the
personification of evil required to launch a crusade for good: the face
behind the faceless terror.

The closer you look, the weaker the case against Bin Laden becomes. While the
terrorists who inflicted Tuesday's dreadful wound may have been inspired by
him, there is, as yet, no evidence that they were instructed by him. Bin
Laden's presumed guilt appears to rest on the supposition that he is the sort
of man who would have done it. But his culpability is irrelevant: his
usefulness to western governments lies in his power to terrify. When billions
of pounds of military spending are at stake, rogue states and terrorist
warlords become assets precisely because they are liabilities.

By using Bin Laden as an excuse for demanding new military spending, weapons
manufacturers in America and Britain have enhanced his iconic status among
the disgruntled. His influence, in other words, has been nurtured by the very
industry which claims to possess the means of stamping him out. This is not
the only way in which the new terrorism crisis has been exacerbated by
corporate power. The lax airport security which enabled the hijackers to
smuggle weapons on to the planes was, for example, the result of corporate
lobbying against the stricter controls the government had proposed.

Now Tuesday's horror is being used by corporations to establish the
preconditions for an even deadlier brand of terror. This week, while the
world's collective back is turned, Tony Blair intends to allow the mixed
oxide plant at Sellafield to start operating. The decision would have been
front-page news at any other time. Now it's likely to be all but invisible.
The plant's operation, long demanded by the nuclear industry and resisted by
almost everyone else, will lead to a massive proliferation of plutonium, and
a high probability that some of it will find its way into the hands of
terrorists. Like Ariel Sharon, in other words, Blair is using the reeling
world's shock to pursue policies which would be unacceptable at any other
time.

For these reasons and many others, opposition has seldom been more necessary.
But it has seldom been more vulnerable. The right is seizing the political
space which has opened up where the twin towers of the World Trade Centre
once stood.

Civil liberties are suddenly negotiable. The US seems prepared to lift its
ban on extra-judicial executions carried out abroad by its own agents. The
CIA might be permitted to employ human rights abusers once more, which will
doubtless mean training and funding a whole new generation of Bin Ladens. The
British government is considering the introduction of identity cards. Radical
dissenters in Britain have already been identified as terrorists by the
Terrorism Act 2000. Now we're likely to be treated as such.

The authoritarianism which has long been lurking in advanced capitalism has
started to surface. In these pages yesterday, William Shawcross - Rupert
Murdoch's courteous biographer - articulated the new orthodoxy: America is,
he maintained, "a beacon of hope for the world's poor and dispossessed and
for all those who believe in freedom of thought and deed". These believers
would presumably include the families of the Iraqis killed by the sanctions
Britain and the US have imposed; the peasants murdered by Bush's proxy war in
Colombia; and the tens of millions living under despotic regimes in the
Middle East, sustained and sponsored by the US.

William Shawcross concluded by suggesting that "we are all Americans now", an
echo of Pinochet's maxim that "we are all Chileans now": by which he meant
that no cultural distinctions would be tolerated and no indigenous land
rights recognised. Shawcross appeared to suggest that those who question
American power are the enemies of democracy. It's a different way of
formulating the warning voiced by members of the Bush administration: "If
you're not with us, you're against us."

The Daily Telegraph has set aside part of its leader column for a directory
of "useful idiots", by which it means those who oppose major military
intervention. Perhaps the roll of honour will soon include families of some
of the victims, who seem to be rather more capable of restraint and
forgiveness than the leader writers of the rightwing press. Mark
Newton-Carter, whose brother appears to have died in the terrorist outrage,
told one of the Sunday newspapers: "I think Bush should be caged at the
moment. He is a loose cannon. He is building up his forces getting ready for
a military strike. That is not the answer. Gandhi said: 'An eye for an eye
makes the whole world blind' and never a truer word was spoken." But when the
right is on the rampage, victims as well as perpetrators are trampled.

Mark Twain once observed that "there are some natures which never grow large
enough to speak out and say a bad act is a bad act, until they have inquired
into the politics or the nationality of the man who did it". The left is able
to state categorically that Tuesday's terrorism was a dreadful act,
irrespective of provenance. But the right can't bring itself to make the same
statement about Israel's new invasions of Palestine, or the sanctions in
Iraq, or the US-backed terror in East Timor, or the carpet bombing of
Cambodia. Its critical faculties have long been suspended and now, it
demands, we must suspend ours too.

Retaining the ability to discriminate between good acts and bad acts will
become ever harder over the next few months, as new conflicts and paradoxes
challenge our preconceptions. It may be that a convincing case against Bin
Laden is assembled, whereupon his forced extradition would be justified. But,
unless we wish to help George Bush use barbarism to defend the "civilisation"
he claims to represent, we must distinguish between extradition and
extermination.

Tuesday's terror may have signalled the beginning of the end of
globalisation. The recession it has doubtless helped to precipitate, coupled
with a new and understandable fear among many Americans of engagement with
the outside world, could lead to a reactionary protectionism in the US, which
is likely to provoke similar responses on this side of the Atlantic. We will,
in these circumstances, have to be careful not to celebrate the demise of
corporate globalisation, if it merely gives way to something even worse.

The governments of Britain and America are using the disaster in New York to
reinforce the very policies which have helped to cause the problem: building
up the power of the defence industry, preparing to launch campaigns of the
kind which inevitably kill civilians, licensing covert action. Corporations
are securing new resources to invest in instability. Racists are attacking
Arabs and Muslims and blaming liberal asylum policies for terrorism. As a
result of the horror on Tuesday, the right in all its forms is flourishing,
and we are shrinking. But we must not be cowed. Dissent is most necessary
just when it is hardest to voice.

 Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to