Terrorism and Terrorists

We are living in a curious age. An age of smoke and mirrors. An age of doublespeak by politicians and doublethink by people.

This is also an age of ‘terrorism.’  The phrase is repeated ad nauseum by the media and by our supposed ‘representative’ governments.

Terrorism. Just what is it exactly?  There does not seem to be a consensus on what its definition is, which is convenient for those who promote it. Some things are obvious though:

Terrorism involves one group inflicting fear upon another through actions or threat of actions designed to further the first groups agenda, mainly political.

When one is ‘terrified’, they are in fear of something. Fear is the key to terrorism. Without it, the group experiencing the terrorism will not be intimidated into altering its view or direction.

But if the bombings in London on July the 7th 2005 did not terrify me, was it still an act of terrorism? Of course it was.

As terrorism ultimately involves the use or threat of violence with the aim of creating fear not only to the victims but among a wide audience, it is fear which distinguishes terrorism from both conventional and guerrilla warfare. While both conventional military forces may engage in psychological warfare and guerrilla forces may engage in acts of terror and other forms of propaganda, they both aim at military victory. Terrorism on the other hand aims to achieve political or other goals, when direct military victory is not possible. – Wikipedia

As the goal is inciting fear, propaganda is a very effective form of terrorism. Much more so than the physical aspect of a terrorist attack. For if the people rejected the propaganda, the terrorist act would be rendered ineffective. Therefore the greater the fear inflicted, and the greater the changes to a peoples’ way of life, the more successful the terrorist.

This age of terrorism revolves around two acts of ‘terrorism’. 9/11/2001 in New York, and 7/7/2005 in London. 9/11 led to the nonsensical ‘War on Terror’, and 7/7 led to Tony Blair escaping a roasting from the people of Britain.

For once, I am going to avoid talking about the attacks. I am going to avoid talking about the public inquiry Blair refused on the 7/7 bombing, and the massive amount of pressure Bush had to be put under to create the 9/11 Commission, which had more conflicts of interest than the Labour party and its donors, and focus on something that hasn’t gotten quite the attention it deserves.

Fear mongering.

Committing a terrorist act, to incite terror, to create fear, to use that fear to manipulate a group to alter their position on something politically. Remember that.

On 7/7 bombs were detonated on three trains and on a bus. (As an aside, that bus was the only bus that day in London that was redirected by two unmarked cars, which then diverted it off of its route, bringing it to a stop outside the Tavistock Institute, when the bomb was then detonated.)

Tavistock Institute developed the mass brain-washing techniques which were first used experimentally on American prisoners of war in Korea. Its experiments in crowd control methods have been widely used on the American public, a surreptitious but nevertheless outrageous assault on human freedom by modifying individual behavior through topical psychology. A German refugee, Kurt Lewin, became director of Tavistock in 1932. He came to the U.S. in 1933 as a “refugee”, the first of many infiltrators, and set up the Harvard Psychology Clinic, which originated the propaganda campaign to turn the American public against Germany and involve us in World War II. – Source

The despicable attack on 7/7 resulted in the deaths of 52 innocent people and the injury of approximately 700 more.

Now, after the attacks, comes the terrorising.

Rolling news coverage of the attacks was broadcast throughout 7 July, by both BBC One and ITV1 uninterrupted until 7pm. Sky News did not carry any advertisements for 24 hours. ITN later confirmed that its coverage on ITV1 was its longest uninterrupted on-air broadcast in its 50 year history. Television coverage was notable for the use of mobile phone video sent in from members of the public and live shots from traffic CCTV cameras. Local and national radio also generally either suspended regular programming for news reports, or provided regular updates as part of scheduled shows. – Source

As with 9/11, the media kept up a sustained blitz of footage. Repeated broadcasts of apparent confession videos, still images, footage from the scene, the destroyed bus, the mobile phone footage on the trains etc.

Constantly, non stop. For months and months and months. Public attention swiftly changed from criticism of Blair and focussed on ‘attacking Al-Qaida,’ wherever they may be, justifying their perpetual War On Terror and ‘protecting the country from terrorism,’ which conveniently involved the government taking rights and freedoms away from the people.

So, main story goes that Al-Qaida did it. The group who benefited the most however, is the government. They passed hundreds of laws concerning data protection, surveillance of the public, data sharing, police powers, restrictions to freedom of speech, massive appropriations of public funds to defense contractors, and silencing dissent.

Nice for big government. Possible Al-Qaida countries were bombed to hell and back, so it is hard to see how they benefited from it.

Cui Bono. Who benefits.

Now. Let’s bring back terrorism again.

Terrorism involves one group inflicting fear upon another through actions or threat of actions designed to further the first groups agenda, mainly political.

How many people were directly terrorised by 7/7? 52 deaths, 700 casualties, a few hundred more who saw.

Let’s say about 1500 Londoners.

Britain has a population of approximately 60 million.

If the government were interested in protecting the people, they would seek to protect the people from terror/ fear.

But if inciting terror was the goal of the government and the complicit media, then it would make damn sure that not one person in the country did not know about 7/7 and how scared they should be.

Which is exactly what happened. That would also go some way to explaining the rejection by Blair of calls for a public inquiry.

Terrorists: Terrorised almost 1500 with the attacks.
Government: Terrorised almost 60 million people with the propaganda.

Terrorists: Got their ‘home’ countries invaded by the West, with the deaths and hundreds and hundreds of thousands, the saturation of depleted uranium all over the place, the removal of government and the insertion of Western puppet regimes, and the loss of their oil assets to Western corporations.
Government: Frightened the public into silence. Wrote countless new laws that only benefit the government and not the people. Stifled dissent. Regulated free speech. Expanded the size, scope and power of government in almost every way. Re-directed vast sums from the public purse to private pockets. Increased surveillance of the people. And it is still continuing.

Funnily enough, some of the earliest definitions of terrorism were:

According to the Britannica Concise terrorism is “systematic use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective”. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, State terrorism, also known as Establishment Terrorism, is “employed by governments—or more often by factions within governments—against that government’s citizens, against factions within the government, or against foreign governments or groups. This type of terrorism is very common but difficult to identify, mainly because the state’s support is always clandestine.” – Source

The term “terrorism” comes from Latin terrere, “to frighten” via the French word terrorisme, which is often associated with the regime de la terreur, the Reign of Terror of the revolutionary government in France from 1793 to 1794 – Source

A January 30, 1795 use of the word ‘terrorism’ in The Times, possibly the first appearance in English. The excerpt reads: “There exists more than one system to overthrow our liberty. Fanaticism has raised every passion; Royalism has not yet given up its hopes, and Terrorism feels bolder than ever.”

Interestingly, the American definition of terrorism is a reversal of the word’s original meaning, given in the Oxford English Dictionary as “government by intimidation”. Today it usually refers to intimidation of governments. – Source

I am not the first one to make this point, and I won’t be the last.

J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign

The Downing Street Memo


2 thoughts on “Terrorism and Terrorists

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s