Wake up and smell the corruption!

Hit a raw nerve, did I? I must be doing something right because I've received an inbox-full of colourful hate mail from over the pond in the last few days. I find it amusing that I'm accused of being anti-American for criticising the insidious foreign policy of the United States and the duplicitous nature of its unelected leader. What exactly is it you're trying say here, that American values are so inexplicably linked with hypocrisy, imperialism and dishonesty that castigating these 'virtues' is tantamount to attacking the American populous as a whole?

You do the average American a grave disservice by reflexively leaping to the defence of the Bush administration as though they are one and the same thing. Is it really so difficult to separate the actions of one incompetent buffoon and his cronies from everything else which incorporates the United States of America? Nowhere else in the world would you be accused of being anti a whole country, their culture and way of life for so much as daring to criticise a single component of it. Bush appears to have done such a thorough job of brainwashing you, you are convinced that questioning his Machiavellian actions is somehow antithetical to being a good American. I wonder, if it was Hitler I was bashing, would I be accused of being anti-Nazi as though that were a bad thing?

It is precisely this kind of subversive manipulation that is the driving force behind the introduction of the Patriot Act. Hey, the country is under attack so I'm afraid we're going to have to revoke your right to freedom and civil liberties, OK? We don't want to of course, but needs must, you know. What, you don't agree? Where's your loyalty to America you heretic? This is no time to be sponsoring the terrorists - that's just what you're doing whenever you choose not to toe the line like a pliable, flag-waving patriot. The newspeak choice of words is so transparent its patronising.

Truth be known, Bush planned to invade Iraq long before 9/11; the terrorist attacks merely provided a convenient justification for furthering the geopolitical agenda of a bunch of slavering megalomaniacs. That Bush should exploit the deaths of 3000 people to rally the troops and public into backing his illegal war is so abysmally sickening that words don't do it justice. Worse than callously profiting from the massacre of thousands of innocent people is being forewarned of their impending demise and doing absolutely nothing to prevent it. There are even precedents to suggest that there would be advantages to be gained from masterminding homeland attacks from within the White House and blaming them on enemies of convenience.

Even if this isn't true of 9/11, the Bush administration has a hell of a lot of explaining to do. For instance, why was military defence strategy protocol not followed in order to quell the arial attacks? Normally whenever a plane or helicopter enters within a 15 mile radius of the vicinity of the World Trade Centre and is reported to be flying off course, air force jets are scrambled so as to be ready to forcefully remove the threat. If the warnings to steer clear are unheeded and the aircraft proceeds to encroach on the three mile radius of the WTC, it is to be unceremoniously obliterated.

Why then were no jets mobilised before one of the hijacked passenger planes struck the first tower of the WTC? The WTC is equipped with hi-tech surveillance equipment specifically designed to detect the presence of arial threats. Were these systems deliberately disabled, or ignored? Maybe computer error played a part in the first instance, but what of the second collision? The second passenger plane didn't strike until a further fifteen minutes had expired. Again, where were the air force?

Why, when Bin Laden was riding high on the CIA's most wanted list, did they meet with him in Dubai seven weeks before 9/11 and not detain him? Did Bush's 25 year long business relationship with the Bin Laden family have any bearing on the matter? Why, when 15 of the 19 terrorists identified as being responsible for the WTC attacks originated from Saudi Arabia, did we instead declare war on Afghanistan? Why were Bin Laden's family lavished with VIP treatment, flown out of the US and out of harm's way right after the WTC attacks when every other flight had been grounded? How is it the Israeli businesses located inside the WTC had the foresight to break their tenancy contracts and move premises a week before the planes struck?

You will find more explicit details of each of these unanswered questions and more besides at the home page of the From the Wilderness Timeline. Alternatively you could stick your fingers in your ears, close your browser and declare me an insane conspiracy theorist. It's entirely up to you.

Whatever the explanation for this highly suspicious chain of events, Bush duped a number of world leaders into joining his 'war on terrorism', subsequently condemning many thousands of servicemen to death for no apparent reason. After all this time no weapons of mass destruction have been found, no link between Al Qaeda and Iraq has been established and the inhabitants of this war ravaged hellhole are no safer than they were under the rule of Saddam Hussein. The ruse that we are over there to liberate the Iraqi people was blown clear out of the water when it emerged that coalition soldiers, under the command of their superiors, have been systematically abusing prisoners at Hussein's former den of torture, Abu Ghraib - it has since been confirmed by the Red Cross that between 70% and 90% of these prisoners have committed no crime whatsoever, I should add.

As long as the public can so easily be riled and manipulated by the incessant drumming of the ever-impending terrorist threat, 9/11 will continue to be used to justify escalating violations of human rights. Bush can maim, slaughter and plunder until the cows come home - all he has to do to win the support of the public is interject with the weary phrase, may I remind you of 9/11?