Home

Making New Enemies
- Essential to Healthy Military/Industrial Complex

Comment by Larry Ross, April 3, 2005

Paul Robinson's study reveals that our perceptions and fears of terrorism are shaped by leaders such as Bush and Blair and sensationalised by a media too indolent to do their own research. With the end of the cold war and winding down of preparations to fight a war with the USSR it was essential to create a new enemy - and a credible strategy - that could be used by Bush and Blair to keep their military/industrial complexes healthy and growing. So we now have Bush's endless war on terrorism. These are really wars against nations and peoples in order to steal assets such as oil. Opponents of this conquest are called “terrorists”.

Bush tactics make far more opponents (or “terrorists”) than he kills. This is also a method of controlling the US and UK publics, suppressing dissent and information, creating the 'right information' and 'The Truth’ 1984 style, maximising profits, getting unlimited access to the treasury, and awarding fabulous bid-free contracts to political donors and supporters. It's an unscrupulous politicians dream - the kind of politicians who commit election fraud and crimes against the US public and constitution, in order to get elected. I'm talking about George Bush, his administration and his coalition of willing poodles. The 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers in 2001, made The Bush Administration and will help perpetuate it.

To justify the war on Iraq and everything since, Bush's neocons wrote in their pre-9/11 Iraq war plans that "we need another Pearl Harbour". 9/11 gave it to them, and they were keen to start the pre-planned Iraq war from the day 9/11 happened. They did not have a shred of real evidence to support this war, so they created a litany of justifying lies. Other articles on this site under "US Elections" and "9/11 Questions" show US election fraud and doubt the 'official' story on the origins of 9/11.

As other articles on this site show, Bush has created the new military strategies that will allow endless 'terrorist' wars against anyone the Bush clique chooses. Bush and his aides have found that their selected enemies do not need to have, or be making, nuclear and other WMD, links with terrorists, or plots against the U.S. It is enough that he claims they have, in order to justify a US war against them.

From a declining influence Bush’s wars made him much more popular and powerful. The US treasury opened like a flower, and he and his backers got just about anything they asked for. Whatever the costs and risks, they are hell-bound to continue their conquest.

Democratic, Conservative or Labour political opposition to the war and exposure of the lies in the US, UK and Australia, was either non-existent, lacklustre, timid or purposely irrelevant. Some so-called opposing politicians agreed with the war and and even parroted the lies justifying it. Even today, opposing politicians have not apologised for misleading their publics.

Paul Robinson punctures the terrorist myths of Bush, Blair and their embedded, collaborationist media.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Good News About Terrorism

Paul Robinson, 04/02/05 "The Spectator"

‘We are facing the gravest threat that this nation has ever faced.’ Elizabeth I, speaking of the Spanish Armada? Winston Churchill, in the aftermath of Dunkirk? No. Home Office minister Baroness Scotland on Newsnight, justifying the new Prevention of Terrorism Act by reference to the threat from al-Qa’eda.

‘Hang on,’ I said to myself on hearing the Baroness, ‘that can’t be right.’ My mum can remember lying in bed hearing bombs drop, and she once saw a V1 go over and heard the engine cut out as she watched. As an army officer a decade ago I used to have to check under my car for IRA bombs every time I went out. Army officers don’t have to do that any more. The gravest threat ever? Surely not.

But as an academic, I am loath to scoff without investigating the facts. Since my speciality is international security, I attend many conferences with and about the military-industrial establishment. With a few exceptions, I hear the same view with monotonous regularity — the world is more dangerous than ever before, the threat from Islamist terrorism is unlike anything we have ever known, our way of life and our very existence are menaced. Challenge this accepted wisdom and everybody looks at you as if you are an idiot. What is it they know that I don’t?

Full Article from ICH