Terrorist Threats or the Politics of Fear? By William Hardiker

Terrorist Threats or the Politics of Fear?

By William Hardiker

Al-Jazeerah, August 24, 2006

The alleged trans-Atlantic plot to blow up airliners precipitated yet another code red, imminent threat from terrorists within our midst. These occurrences, as they arise send government agencies, corporations and most of all the media into a frenzy of eager anticipation and excessive reporting. For the rest of us, we have little choice but to suffer the insecurities and inconveniences that such alerts initiate on face value without having any real evidence to substantiate that which we are informed. Can we trust those official sources that have a vested interest in keeping the terrorist threat alive and healthy? It serves the interests of those allied to the Bush Administrations "War on terrorism" to continue with a political strategy that is best described as the 'politics of fear' in order to support their geo-strategic agenda in the Middle east by way of creating the perception that we all face an imminent threat from Islamic extremists who could strike anywhere at any time. But without solid evidence can we place our faith in these people who have complete control over the terrible threat of terrorism?

It is now clear that there was in fact no imminent threat of attack to be thwarted in relation to the alleged scheme to blow up trans-Atlantic commercial airliners on August 10. However the massive response unleashed by the American and British governments succeeded in creating a near hysterical response within official circles, the media, and airline industry and police and security agencies. This case follows a familiar pattern Allegations are made by the authorities, the media springs into overdrive embellishing and exaggerating the official line. Very soon thereafter the story falls from the headlines with no accountability for the initial claims. Meanwhile world attention is diverted from other sensitive current events such as Israel’s war on Lebanon. As James K Galbraith points out in his article, we should now be hearing about bombs, of which there were none, chemicals, detonators, Labs, testing grounds, airline tickets (none of which were purchased), passports, witnesses, suspicious friends, neighbours and parents, threats and confessions. The two pieces of information we have, i.e. the fact that no airline tickets were purchased and that there were no bombs does not imbue one with great confidence that an imminent threat was thwarted. As a direct result of the imminent threat Prime Minister Tony Blair is planning to push through 90 day detention without charge for terror suspects. Home secretary Dr. John Reed has ordered the draft of new anti-terror legislation that would suspend key parts of the Human Rights Act of 1998, to facilitate the indefinite detention of terrorism suspects within the UK without charge or trial. The plan is also planned to apply to British citizens. The truth is that the August 10 imminent terrorist threat was thoroughly and critically politicized. There was never any evidence of an imminent threat. A senior British official involved in the investigation told NBC News on 14 August that “in contrast to previous reports an attack was not imminent, and the suspects had not purchased airline tickets. In fact some did not even have passports”.

It is becoming increasingly apparent that the government 'whipped up' media hysteria about the alleged plot was prompted not by security concerns but rather by a politically motivated desire to divert attention from the present crisis of both the Bush and Blair governments. The worsening of the situation in Iraq, mounting domestic disapproval of the war, a deteriorating military situation in Afghanistan and the unfavourable outcome of Israel’s war in Lebanon causes one to consider that the latest “terror alert” was but a diversionary tactic that both governments hoped would foster an atmosphere of fear and panic in order to disorient the public and facilitate further attacks on democratic rights. It is now abundantly clear that there was no imminent attack to be thwarted. Without Israel’s disastrous public relations war in Lebanon, which also reflected badly in terms of world opinion for the US and Great Britain, most if not all of these occurrences, i.e. the near hysteria within the media, airline industry and police agencies would not have taken place. They were simply wild and lurid rumours in which minor events were sensationalized and reported as new “terror events”.

The war on terror, from an official point of view cannot be allowed to leave the headlines for too long lest the public begin to question just how 'at risk' they actually are and whether in fact the threat is any greater than it has ever been prior to September 11, 2001. The latest terrorist scare seems to follow what is now becoming an established pattern contrived when the diverting of attention is deemed necessary. Allegations are made by the authorities, the media swings into overdrive to promote and embellish the official line and consequently the initial claims are abandoned and the stories drop out of the headlines. Meanwhile the media waits with baited breath for the next headline terror threat.

Earth, a planet hungry for peace

Apartheid Wall


The Israeli Land-Grab Apartheid Wall built inside the Palestinian territories, here separating Abu Dis from occupied East Jerusalem. (IPC, 7/4/04).

The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers in the West Bank, like a Python. (Alquds,10/25/03).

Opinions expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors and they may not represent Al-Jazeerah's.

editor@aljazeerah.info