While US agencies and their medieval Arab allies sponsor terrorist groups in the Middle East and North Africa for political purposes, US agencies promote terrorist acts within the US. Can you imagine why?
However, there were some statements in the article that troubled me. Generally, the author accepts the government's story about 9/11. Specifically, this statement jumped out at me because it was in sharp contrast to many other reports I've read:
The men responsible for downing the World Trade Center were disciplined and patient....For example, in Welcome to Terrorland: Mohamed Atta & the 9-11 Cover-up in Florida, the author, Daniel Hopsicker, through his investigations found that Atta and companions were living it up in their Florida hangouts, doing cocaine and downing more booze than an eighties rock band. They partied hard at strip clubs and Atta even kept one of the strippers for a girlfriend. This description hardly fits that of a "disciplined and patient" group of terrorist plotters.
Then the author accepts the government's assertion that Al Qaeda launched a new program described by the FBI as follows:
Al Qaeda’s leaders moved to what FBI officials describe as a “franchise model.” If you can’t run Al Qaeda as a hierarchical, centrally organized outfit, the theory went, run it as a franchise. In other words, export ideas—not terrorists. Al Qaeda and its affiliated organizations went online, setting up websites and forums dedicated to instilling their beliefs in disenfranchised Muslims already living in Western nations.This article looks to me like a piece designed in the mode of damage control to contain the public's reaction to reports of entrapment of unstable individuals by government agencies. The author never questions government's statements, which he often quotes, regarding so-called Al Qaeda operations; but merely suggests that some of their tactics in luring lone malcontents into terrorist activities are misguided. Referring to such entrapment operations as "sting operations", the author accepts other government justifications:
...it has been an effective tool for decades. It’s also the direct predecessor to today’s terrorism sting. Instead of empty briefcases, the FBI today uses inert bombs and disabled assault rifles, and now that counter-terrorism is the Bureau’s top priority, the investigation of major drug crimes has largely fallen back to the DEA. Just as no-dope busts resulted in the arrest and prosecution of those in the drug trade in the twentieth century, terrorism sting operations are resulting in the arrest and prosecution of would-be terrorists in this century.Such is journalism from liberal media in the US. They often, like AlterNet pretend to offer alternative and critical analysis of current issues like this article with its dramatic anti-government headline, but its content actually stays within limits acceptable to the ruling class.
