septiembre 12, 2015 § Deja un comentario
WARNING: Reading and diffusion of this post can increase levels of user tracking by some Intelligence agencies
To he victims of 9/11, American and non-American citizens; simply lives of innocent human beings cut short by either geopolitics, IN MEMORIAM
Quod est veritas? (Pilatus to Jesus, John, 18:38, ca. 90 A. D.)
When two or more explanations are offered for a phenomenon, the simplest explanation is preferably complete; ie entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily (Ockham, ca. 1280-1349 A. D.)
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (US Constitution, First Amendment, 1787 A. D., “de facto” repealed by the unconstitutional Patriot Act of 9/26/2001 A. D.)
“¿La verdad? Puede que no la soportaras” (Alejandro Amenábar, original screenplay for the the picture, “Abre los ojos”, directed by Alejandro Amenábar, Spain, 1997 A. D.)
Much has been written, never enough, on pain of innocents who perished in this criminal act. I will not add anything about the pain. Much has been written, from different ideological positions on the responsibility for the attacks, with more or less rigor. It is at this point, to fourteen years away, which I would write something. What follows are only intuitions, but I really felt. In honor of the victims of geopolitics. In a cry of a lonely man with nothing who has nothing to lose, and remember that terrible day, without evidences of more responsibles that maybe should be searched “at home”, close to the US’ stablishment represented by institutions so opaque and for which a good part of the American people have as much distrust as the NSA or the CIA.
Of that fatal day I remember people jumping out of windows, the World Trade Center collapsing in a few hours, chaos taking over New York, Bruce Springsteen’ s song “My city in ruins” … But have told not want to write a sentimentalist post.
14 years afer 9/11, too much things remain unclear. May be my best tribute to the victims and to the truth that one day we will know, Susan Sontag‘s article which I reproduce below, written just two weeks after 9/11. A very interesting reflection on the use of force and its ability to face the new “enemy” appeared on the scene that terrible day. Nowadays, to hold the opinion that writing about 9/11 to 14 years away is not something actual, I will say that, in my humble opinion, with the attack on the World Trade Center began in earnest the XXI century, after a transitional period that began with the fall of the Berlin Wall and the self-annihilation of the only power, with all its faults, that was a real counterweight to the expansion plans of US imperialism: the Soviet Union. Do not forget that Bin Laden was trained by the self-proclaimed “free world” in their struggle against the USSR. In my country -but I think this is a universal aphorism- people use to say: “Who sows winds will reap whirlwinds“.
Due to my research vocation, academic rigor and forms in my professional activity have always warned me to the “conspiracy theories” not proven, following the known formulation of the principle of parsimony of Ockham’s razor, according to which in equal conditions, the simplest theory explaining a sector of reality is often true. However, when the rigorous analysis of the data points in one direction traditionally regarded as unusual, not only unreasonable, but required for a true researcher or “seeker of truth”, meet other explanations that lead to open the door to other realities can turn into a “must”. Turning to social analysis, and very briefly, the aim of the social majority, through the pernicious institution of private property as such has become transformed in the stage of post-Fordist global capitalism, has lead to an abuse of the property and its use by the big corporations, that have extended a neoliberal way of mind which consists in a huge irresponsibility towards the use of natural resources and the fair distribution and redistribution of resources and wealth among all the inhabitants of the planet. As the Pope recently has remeber, the First World continue to consume resources at a price that does not reflect their real value and that eventually run dry.
Despite the lack of evidence, I have the intuition that the Federal Government, or its Agencies of Intelligence, are in some way interested in weaken Europe and create alarm to impose its “new world order” that passes through the control and, finally, by the indoctrination of the entire population. Hopefully I’m wrong, but the opposite view which explains the attacks on New York / Washington, Madrid, London, Paris, attacks of “Charlie Hebdo” in February this year in Belgium, the many successive attacks of possible “false flag” may reach the status of a consistent explanation of the US’ s geopolitics since 9/11. You cannot stand in the creation of a phantom enemy as operating that can oppose the US Intelligence without the help of a section of the West. Anyway, against Islamic fanaticism cannot fight putting more Police in front of key objectives of unfair capitalism, represented, for example, in my country, by “Zara” or “El Corte Ingles”, much less equipping the police with assault rifles G-36 German made, but by analyzing the causes of the crisis unleashed, conspicuously, by the effects of Islamic fundamentalism and adopting a policy of alliance of civilizations “real”, involving face one of the biggest causes of conflicts that are on the based fundamentalist attitudes of their unscrupulous leaders exploit: the extreme poverty in which the West has condemned most former colonial societies and the stranglehold of opaque Bretton Woods institutions, under whose protection is set prices of raw materials, war (declared no longer, but simply being waged) are made, and the pretexts that the West needs to keep its decadent “civilization”, walking quickly towards barbarism may be invented. Dialectics of Enlightenment totalitarian now meets and freedom on behalf of which the West wanted to exorcise their myths ends up giving in to the administered society, “civilization of security”, as will predict in the forties Horkheimer and Adorno one of the last books of “strong thought” and therefore defense of modernity, precisely titled “Dialectic of Enlightenment”. Against this, I maintain that only humanism, be it secular or religious (and both never fanatic cases), and attention to the dignity of the person as the center of social and economic system can save the West of a disaster which so laboriously have gained and, incidentally, the whole world may be saved.
From Pablo Guérez, PhD
Doctor of Juridical Science
Ex Professor of Criminal Law at the Autonomous University of Madrid
Member of the Institute of Forensic Sciences and Security ICFS-UAM, Madrid
The disconnect between last Tuesday’s monstrous dose of reality and the self-righteous drivel and outright deceptions being peddled by public figures and TV commentators is startling, depressing. The voices licensed to follow the event seem to have joined together in a campaign to infantilize the public. Where is the acknowledgment that this was not a “cowardly” attack on “civilization” or “liberty” or “humanity” or “the free world” but an attack on the world’s self-proclaimed superpower, undertaken as a consequence of specific American alliances and actions? How many citizens are aware of the ongoing American bombing of Iraq? And if the word “cowardly” is to be used, it might be more aptly applied to those who kill from beyond the range of retaliation, high in the sky, than to those willing to die themselves in order to kill others. In the matter of courage (a morally neutral virtue): whatever may be said of the perpetrators of Tuesday’s slaughter, they were not cowards.
Our leaders are bent on convincing us that everything is O.K. America is not afraid. Our spirit is unbroken, although this was a day that will live in infamy and America is now at war. But everything is not O.K. And this was not Pearl Harbor. We have a robotic President who assures us that America still stands tall. A wide spectrum of public figures, in and out of office, who are strongly opposed to the policies being pursued abroad by this Administration apparently feel free to say nothing more than that they stand united behind President Bush. A lot of thinking needs to be done, and perhaps is being done in Washington and elsewhere, about the ineptitude of American intelligence and counter-intelligence, about options available to American foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East, and about what constitutes a smart program of military defense. But the public is not being asked to bear much of the burden of reality. The unanimously applauded, self-congratulatory bromides of a Soviet Party Congress seemed contemptible. The unanimity of the sanctimonious, reality-concealing rhetoric spouted by American officials and media commentators in recent days seems, well, unworthy of a mature democracy.
Those in public office have let us know that they consider their task to be a manipulative one: confidence-building and grief management. Politics, the politics of a democracy—which entails disagreement, which promotes candor—has been replaced by psychotherapy. Let’s by all means grieve together. But let’s not be stupid together. A few shreds of historical awareness might help us understand what has just happened, and what may continue to happen. “Our country is strong,” we are told again and again. I for one don’t find this entirely consoling. Who doubts that America is strong? But that’s not all America has to be.
— © Susan Sontag, published on The New Yorker, september 24, 2001.