James E. Miller
Ludwig von Mises Institute
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Today it was widely reported that the CIA thwarted a “plot by al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen to destroy a U.S.-bound airliner using a bomb.” This bomb, which was to be concealed in a pair of underwear, was designed as an improvement over what Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab attempted to use to blow up an airliner over Detroit on Christmas Day of 2009. This bomb was upgraded and designed to specifically avoid metal detectors.
At first glance it would appear to be a job well done by the world’s leading domestic affairs meddlers.
But like all of these instances, it was routinely denied “there was ever any immediate threat to the public.” It was also revealed that:
The bomb plot had allegedly advanced to the point that a would-be suicide bomber was told to buy a ticket on the airliner of his choosing and decide the timing of the attack. It’s not immediately clear what happened to the would-be bomber.
It would seem that what the CIA recovered was essentially just a crudely made bomb. The supposed bomber was nowhere to be found. There is no evidence presented as to a real threat or plan to use it.
The truth was finally revealed as the would-be bomber was, in fact, a double agent of the CIA.
When considering the nature of the state, this new instance of government supported terrorism is unsurprisingly comparable to previous cases.
Looking back at the original underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the mainstream narrative nowhere matches the disturbing details. Not only was Abdulmutallab’s explosive device determined not to be functional but, according toundersecretary for management at the State Department Patrick Kennedy, his visa wasn’t confiscated and he was given access to the airplane for the purposes of conducting further investigation. This came at the request of federal counterterrorism officials.
As former Assistant Secretary to the U.S. Treasury and acclaimed commentator Paul Craig Roberts documents in regards to attempted terrorist attacks since September 11, 2001:
If we look around for the terror that the police state and a decade of war has allegedly protected us from, the terror is hard to find. Except for 9/11 itself, assuming we accept the government’s improbable conspiracy theory explanation, there have been no terror attacks on the US. Indeed, as RT pointed out on August 23, 2011, an investigative program at the University of California discovered that the domestic “terror plots” hyped in the media were plotted by FBI agents.
For example, the Washington DC Metro bombing plot, the New York city subway plot, the plot to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago were all FBI brainchilds organized and managed by FBI agents.
RT reports that only three plots might have been independent of the FBI, but as none of the three worked they obviously were not the work of such a professional terror organization as Al Qaeda is purported to be. The Times Square car bomb didn’t blow up, and apparently could not have.
Think now about the airliner shoe-bomb plot, the shampoo-bottled water plot, and the underwear-bomb plot. Experts, other than the whores hired by the US government, say that these plots are nonsensical. The “shoe bomb” and “underwear bomb” were colored fireworks powders incapable of blowing up a tin can. The liquid bomb, allegedly mixed up in an airliner toilet room, has been dismissed by experts as fantasy.
Just this past May Day, the FBI reportedly foiled an attempted bombing of a bridge near Cleveland. But like many instances of domestic terrorism, this operation was aided andfacilitated by the FBI itself. On cue, authorities assured the public it “was never in any danger.”
Far from having their liberty secured, the American public is being lulled into a sense of infant dependency from engineered threats from abroad and at home.
The art of governing can be broken down into two easy steps: scare the citizenry into capitulation with manufactured threats and legislate yourself increasing amounts of power.
With the illusion of monsters from foreign countries breathing down their necks, those infatuated with “national defense” as some unworldly savior are more than willing to bow down and submit themselves to having their privacy torn to shreds for the feeling of security. They are no better than children who wrap themselves in a blanket for fear of an unknown boogeyman. The corporate media, never letting an opportunity of state worship go to waste, vets out the reports of threats with little if any vigor. The Associate Press actually found out about the newly “foiled” underwear bomb threat last week but submitted to White House demands to hold off on reporting the story. After all, there is too much money at stake to not buddy up with Washington and keep a frightened populace spoon-fed with false delusions.
The danger in such juvenile acceptance of war propaganda is the creeping hand of despotism that must emerge. For if the public is lead to believe danger lurks in every shadow of the world, it will demand greater and greater protection from exactly those who salivate at the chance to provide it. From the Patriot Act to the National Defense Authorization Act, private correspondence and due process have been casually tossed aside for the promise of safety. This vicious cycle is reinforced by contrived instances of impending doom. The ruling class creates them and then feeds off the panic.
Even Bush administration spokesman Ari Fleischer admitted that “fake” terror alerts were used in 2002 to quell growing criticism amongst the public and particular Congressmen.
The famous Randolph Bourne quote “war is the health of the state” is often invoked as a simple dictum to demonstrate the irrefutable connection between government usurpations of authority and organized combat on a massive, industrialized scale. Almost any respectable writer, historian, or economist will cite the phrase when addressing the topic of warfare. That’s because in just seven plain words the mentality and violent temperament of those who sit at the state’s controls are defined so explicitly, it completely disrobes the glory and prestige too often associated with bloodthirsty crusades of patriotism.
Murray Rothbard recognized the underlying immorality of the government’s war machine complex when he wrote:
It is in war that the State really comes into its own: swelling in power, in number, in pride, in absolute domination over the economy and the society. Society becomes a herd, seeking to kill its alleged enemies, rooting out and suppressing all dissent from the official war effort, happily betraying truth for the supposed public interest. Society becomes an armed camp, with the values and the morale—as Albert Jay Nock once phrased it—of an “army on the march.”
The alleged Yemen “underwear” bomber was just another fabricated spook in the long line of mounting justifications to keep the war on terror and its profiteers going; no matter the cost. As long as the American people are still easily whipped into a frenzy over forged menaces from afar, their blood and treasure will go on to be squandered on military boondoggles and redundant intelligence agencies. War and fear end up becoming a way of life. And so does the state’s command over what could be a life of peace and tranquility for the nation it supposedly protects.
This isn’t conspiracy theory; just a recognition of the various hobgoblins, as H.L. Mencken described them, invented to justify encroaching totalitarianism.
James E. Miller holds a BS in public administration with a minor in business from Shippensburg University, PA. He is the chief blogger at the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada and a current contributor to his hometown newspaper, the Middletown Press and Journal.