Before I begin here, I think perhaps I should make my own beliefs very clear to any potential readers. First of all, the crime of “sedition” has always been defined as advocating the overthrow of a legal government by force or violence.
Sedition is a crime. It should be a crime, and I make a very careful effort not to commit it, whatever my level of personal rage. Furthermore, I do believe that the crime of sedition should be punished to the fullest possible extent of the law. In the course of a legally declared and prosecuted war, one can even stretch the crime of sedition to treason, and that is no accident.
The crime of “terrorism” is defined as using violence, or the threat of violence, against innocent persons to create a climate of fear.
Terrorism is a crime. It should be a crime. It is a crime I find personally abhorrent and morally repugnant. Furthermore, I believe that genuine terrorists – persons who have actually committed such a crime – should be punished to the fullest possible extent of the law. Read this carefully. I said the “fullest possible extent of the law.” The law does not embrace “disappearing” people, or torturing them, or holding them indefinitely without charge and without trial. It does provide for a speedy trial, and if a conviction by a jury of the accused’s peers is the result of that trial, it does provide for lengthy prison sentences – and in cases where deaths result, even for the legal application of the death penalty.
Despite the silly rhetoric of some politicians over the last few decades, you really can’t declare a war against a crime. Crimes call for careful investigation, followed by the apprehension and trial of the most likely suspects. Crimes do not call for the invasion of sovereign nations, nor for a war on individual liberties here at home.
Terrorism is a crime. It is not a war. One smart and competent police detective is worth a thousand armies when it comes to solving and prosecuting any crime, large or small.
The dangers of declaring a war when you have no clearly defined sovereign nation as an enemy should be readily apparent to an idiot. How can you sue for peace when there is no one with the authority to hear your plea? How can you sign a treaty with a non-existent nation? Make no mistake, the “war on terror” is not intended to end in your lifetime, or you children’s lifetimes, or your grandchildren’s lifetimes. It will never end if the planners have their way. It is far, far too lucrative.
On the other hand, if war is your actual objective, a terrorist crime can be very helpful in swaying public opinion, particularly the sort of heinous and extremely visible crimes of September 11, 2001. Civilization has a long and distinguished history of this sort of thing. Just to name a few examples:
1. The Reichstag fire in 1933 Germany.
2. The sinking of the Lusitania, which was carrying munitions in violation of international law.
3. The sinking of the Maine in Havana Harbor.
4. Pearl Harbor, which was provoked and allowed to go forward to force our entry into WWII.
5. The Gulf of Tonkin incident, which simply never happened.
6. The babies and incubator testimony which launched Gulf War I.
It has recently been suggested that one symptom of “radicalization” and “home-grown terrorism” is questioning the government myth surrounding what occurred on September 11, 2001. This comes as no particular surprise to me. MSNBC – which is owned by General Electric (a major defense contractor and beneficiary of our “war on terror” wars) and can hardly be accused of being “fringe media” – conducted a poll in September of last year which resulted in 67% of Americans believing that the government is lying about the events of 9/11. Throw in the 5.3% who are not sure, and that makes a whopping 72.3% of America that isn’t comfortable with the official story.
No surprise there. The official story of 9/11 just doesn’t pass the “smell” test even for a hayfever sufferer in the height of ragweed season.
Just in case you were wondering, you can’t get that many Americans to agree on liking a particular cuisine, let alone something as important to us all as this particular issue. You don’t believe me? Write Zogby and ask him. Any professional in the polling business knows this.
These kinds of polls are scaring the $#%$# out of our fearless leaders, and they should be. There are 300,000,000+ resident Americans today. More than two thirds believe the government is lying about the most heinous crime ever committed on U.S. soil. A substantial percentage of those same Americans no longer believe that our elections are free and honest. I’d be scared, too. All thoughts of sedition aside, those 300 million Americans will not put up with this forever. How or when they will resolve it is yet to be determined, but it will happen. You can take that to the bank.
The Internet has been specifically named in recent legislation as a means for “radicalization” of ordinary Americans. Yep. True without a doubt. The Internet is the only remaining source of free and unbiased news in the world, and the real news would piss Mother Theresa off on a daily basis. The Internet has a lot of crap, too, but most Americans can tell the difference.
How our government has reacted to this perceived threat is perhaps the most interesting and revealing point of all.
They are using the threat of violence (rendition, or kidnapping in proper legal terms) to create a climate of fear in the United States that they hope and pray will make folks with the faintest glimmering of a brain – and therefore suspicions concerning the origins and masterminds of 9/11 – shut up and go away, instead of demanding impeachment and a reform of our election systems.
Let me see now, “terrorism” is the use of violence or the threat of violence against innocent persons to create a climate of fear.
Who are the real terrorists here? The mythical nineteen Arab fanatics with boxcutters who somehow defeated all of NORAD on 9/11? Or our own government?
You tell me.