Sydney, January 2010 - News reports of Slovakian authorities concealing explosives in an unsuspecting traveller’s luggage may have escaped coverage in many media outlets[1]. Even worse is that many may not take this incident as hard evidence that authorities in the West “can and do” engage in such bomb planting activities. Now, an entire series of bombings sensationalised by the global media must be put under the spotlight – the shoe bomber, the Madrid blasts, the London bombings, the Bali bombings, Mumbai attacks, a whole series of bombings in Pakistan and other similar Muslim countries and indeed the 9/11 event itself! Is it not at all possible, after seeing the Slovakian incident, that these incidents did not have the involvement of authorities in the West?
The follow up question of course is, “will the authorities in the West do it other than for the purposes of a security exercise?” And this is where the issue of “motive” and the ever important yet often dismissed question in political analysis of “who stands to benefit most?” arise. The debate now shifts, and it must, to the wider observation of the world’s geopolitical status quo – shrinking domestic Western markets, ageing Western puppets in Muslims’ lands, resurgence of Islam as an ideology, other emerging competing interests to the West such as China, Russia, Iran, Latin America. The chopper on the blame-block though, falls almost without fail on a Muslim head – a resurgent Islamic State discarding the West’s ageing puppets becomes a plausible ‘motive’ for Western powers! Therefore to survive the resurgence and a diametrically challenging New World Order the West finds itself compelled to express its hegemony ‘by any means possible’- and that’s where the ‘benefit’ factor lies. That is the world’s status-quo with opportunists on both sides of the camp – the so-called terrorists who have their cause and justification for their ruins and the opportunist West who pry on and perhaps even perpetuate these violent escalations to further their political influence and hegemony in lands beyond their own borders. This is a big call to make, but events in history, particularly of USA, reveal compelling evidences about Western opportunism and perpetuation.
For example there’s the issue of the USS Maine which has been under investigations for decades or perhaps a century, raising doubts about the cause of the explosion that sank it. Yet at the time of the incident, the US took that opportunity to blame the Spaniards and launched a full scale attack against them until they were ousted from Latin America[2]. Hegemony? Well it did mark the beginning of USA’s new foreign policy away from isolationism and toward a more active role in international affairs, a trend which has continued through the twentieth century.
The resonance of that questionable February 1898 blast in the shores of Havana was heard many a times throughout Latin America in the century that followed.
There’s the matter of Luis Posada Carilles who was a Cuban working as CIA agent whilst doubling as a Venezuelan intelligence commissioner. In the 1960s Carilles was a second lieutenant in the US army. Today the governments of Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua all want him to stand trial for multiple acts of terrorism including the bombing of Cuban flight 455 which was known as the deadliest act of terrorism in the Americas until the 9/11 event[3]. Perpetuation?
Any dismissal of these events as misjudgements of the past would be political naivety at best, particularly in the face of the David Coleman Headley case currently rocking India. In the aftermath of the 2009 Mumbai attacks, Indian officials reportedly raised questions about Mr. Headley’s links with US intelligence agencies and the Times of India reports that Indian officials suspect that the CIA knew about Headley’s link with the banned Pakistani militant group, Lashkar-e-Taiba, one year before the Mumbai attacks, but did not alert Indian agencies[4]. More perpetuation!
The case of Ari Ben Manache is another compelling “perpetuation” evidence where USA and Israel had been selling weapons to Iran via Australia, whilst imposing a global ban on arms trade with Iran, during the Iran vs Iraq wars of the 1980s. And the list, including the infiltration of the US Military recruited son of Somali warlord Mohammed Aideeb, is perhaps larger than the scope of this article.
As red alert hits many of the world’s airports following allegations that a Nigerian man suspected of ties to militants in Yemen tried to blow up a US passenger jet on Christmas Day, many a Muslim and non-Muslim are being caught up in the hysteria to generate more fear so that the bogus War on Terror is kept alive by the West and their allies. Yet less than a few dare ask “Could the West be involved itself to create the bombings and other acts of terror?” Certainly the facts, evidences, motives and benefit for the West are compelling enough to escalate such lines of questioning.
[1] See ABC News online, 7 Jan 2009
[2] See http://www.spanamwar.com/Mainemo1.htm and other related sources
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment