'War on terror' actually aimed at Islam
Fri Jan 4, 2013 7:36AM GMT
By Kevin Barrett
And if “terrorism” means “the intentional slaughter of civilians,” the US and Israel commit thousands of times more terrorism than all the Muslims of the world put together."
Public opinion polls show that the vast majority of the world's Muslims know that the “War on Terror” is a barely-disguised War on Islam.
And it isn't just Muslims who understand this. So do all serious Western strategic thinkers.
One of the few who is willing to say it openly is James Schall, Professor of Government at Georgetown University and Hoover Institute strategist: “I always thought it was a mistake not to say what Iraq really was, that is, a war against an expanding Islam.”
But today - eleven and one-half years after the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center launched the War on Islam - that war is bogged down in the mother of all quagmires.
The neoconservatives who orchestrated 9/11 hoped that their stealth war on Islam would achieve quick regime change throughout the Middle East, and break the back of Islamic political movements worldwide. To that end, they invaded Iraq and Afghanistan in order to surround Iran with US military bases. They intended to invade Iran, and destroy its Islamic revolution, by 2005 at the latest.
But the heroic resistance of the Iraqis, Lebanese and Palestinians, and shrewd strategic moves by Iran - together with ideological challenges by the peace movement, the 9/11 truth movement, and the anti-Zionist movement - slowed them down.
By August of 2007, neocon front man Dick Cheney realized that his last opportunity to invade Iran was slipping from his grasp. So Cheney's rogue network attempted to steal nuclear weapons from the US arsenal at Minot Air Force Base, with the intention of using those weapons, whether in the US itself or the Middle East, in order to trigger all-out war on Iran.
Stupid move. The nuke-thieves got caught. Dozens were suicided or met “accidental” deaths.
The command structure of the US military does not look kindly on people who try to steal nuclear weapons - even if the thief-in-chief is the Vice President of the United States.
Since then, the US military has closed ranks against the neocons. The invasion of Iran - the chief objective of the 9/11 conspirators - has been postponed indefinitely, to the infinite chagrin of Netanyahu and his “American” allies. And the larger War on Islam has lost its focus.
But how can it end? When nations are at war, the duly-constituted authorities of both nations can end the war by signing a peace treaty. But since the aggressors (with a few exceptions like Schall) refuse to admit that they are waging war on Islam, and since Islam has no “duly constituted authority” capable of negotiating anything, it is hard to imagine how a peace treaty could end hostilities.
To understand how the War on Islam could end, we must first understand what is really at stake. What is this war really about?
It is certainly not about terrorism. Even if we provisionally accept the official story of 9/11 (which is now doubted by the majority of the world), an American is more than ten times more likely to be struck by lightning, or drown in a bathtub, than to be killed by any kind of terrorist. And according to the FBI, radical Muslims only commit 6% of terrorist attacks - less than radical Jews, and vastly less than radical leftists and hispanics.
And if “terrorism” means “the intentional slaughter of civilians,” the US and Israel commit thousands of times more terrorism than all the Muslims of the world put together. According to studies by Gideon Polya, M.D., the US and its ally, Great Britain, have murdered roughly eight million Iraqis alone since 1950. The total number of victims of US and Israeli state terrorism since World War II, what scholar William Blum calls “the American Holocaust,” is in the tens of millions.
So if it isn’t really about “terrorism” then what’s the actual bone of contention? The short answer: Demographics and religiosity.
Islam is the fastest-growing religion in the world, in part through conversions, but mostly through demographics. Even though Muslim birthrates are falling in most parts of the world, they aren’t falling quite as fast as Western birthrates, which are now below replacement levels and heralding an impending demographic collapse. (Russia and Italy, for example, are projected to lose half their population within a few generations).
Why are Muslim birthrates relatively high? Because Islam is a religion of what we might call “traditional family values.” Sexuality under Islam is limited to community-sanctioned procreative relationships (otherwise known as marriage), and the various vices that have largely destroyed the family in the West - alcohol, drugs, promiscuity, open homosexuality, widespread divorce, egotism, materialism, consumerism and so on - are only making limited progress in their war on the Islamic family. So since Islamic families are relatively happier and more stable, they have more children which means more Muslims.
And that scares some Western policy-makers, especially those who have a strong personal attachment to the state of Israel. The demographic tilt towards Islam will inevitably result in a readjustment of the global balance of power - raising questions about continued Western control of Middle Eastern and Central Asian energy resources, and even thornier questions about the future of Occupied Palestine.
The perceived problem isn’t just the demographics, it’s the potential for Islamic unity turning into a global political force which, in tandem with the rise of China and India, could rob the West of its current status as global hegemon. And it is the shared religiosity of Muslims, the social bonds fostered by religion that draw Muslims together and offer them a chance to readjust the global balance of power in their favor.
Proponents of the War on Islam cannot admit this openly. They cannot say “our real objective is to damage the religion of Islam, break up the Islamic family, and try to reduce the global Muslim population.” They cannot admit that their real objective is genocide.
So they are waging a war of deception. By smearing Muslims as subhuman “terrorists” they can covertly commit genocide while pretending to be the good guys.
The neocons have squandered their opportunity for a sudden, decisive blow against Islam. That means that only two alternatives remain: Either the low-intensity War on Islam will continue indefinitely, with its endless drone killings, false-flag terror strikes, genocidal media propaganda, attempts to provoke intra-Muslim strife, assassinations of Iranian scientists, and so on; or it will end quickly and cleanly with a Western confession that the whole “War on Terror” has been a big lie.
The second alternative would be much cheaper, in terms of blood and treasure.
Here is how it could happen: Senior US military commanders, tired of spilling American blood for Israel, organize a counter-coup against those complicit in the 9/11 operation.
They declare a state of emergency and arrest several dozen current and retired military and intelligence officers, a host of politicians including most of the leading neoconservatives, the owners and decision-makers of the major mainstream media outlets, several of the planet's wealthiest individuals, and key unregistered agents of Israel who operate behind the facade of America's leading Jewish organizations. Seizing control of the newspapers and airwaves, they reveal the truth about 9/11 to a shocked, outraged world. Swift military-style trials elicit confessions and convictions.
Islam is declared innocent. Zionism is guilty. Palestine is liberated. And the war is finally over.
Will it happen in 2013?
If YOU work hard enough spreading the truth about 9/11 and the phony “War on Terror,” anything is possible.
It is possible that this war will end slowly and gradually.