Where’s Osama?
by
Anthony Gregory
by Anthony Gregory
It
has now been four years since the largest foreign terrorist attack
within the United States, and the war on terror, for all its expensive
destruction and rebuilding overseas and attacks on civil liberties
at home, has still failed to apprehend the presumed chief culprit
behind 9/11.
Bush
is probably too preoccupied with the horrendous aftermath of Katrina
– surely doing everything he can to deliver "millions
of tons of food" to the victims – to worry about the loose
ends from the last domestic catastrophe over which he presided.
And yet, it seems a fair question to ask: Where’s Osama?
Four
years ago, Americans who found the approaches of perpetual war and
a Big Brother surveillance state to be undesirable, unnecessary
or counterproductive means of bringing justice to the 9/11 mass
murderers were accused of not facing reality. Treating 9/11 as a
crime, we were told, would never nab the villains. Only by unleashing
the dogs of war, by going on the offensive, and by shifting the
"balance" from liberty toward security could America destroy
the enemy, neutralize the immediate threat, and ensure our freedom
and safety.
Well,
let us consider what has happened in the last four years. On October
7, 2001, less than one month after the terrorist attacks, the U.S.
government dropped the façade of negotiations with the Taliban
and launched an incredibly popular military assault, originally
called "Operation Infinite Justice" but soon renamed "Operation
Enduring Freedom," on the impoverished and persecuted nation
of Afghanistan. Hundreds if not thousands of innocent Afghans were
killed in a matter of weeks and hundreds of thousands were soon
displaced from their homes. Upon losing thousands of innocent compatriots
to a hijacking atrocity engineered and carried out by a handful
of Saudis, Americans somehow found comfort in the brutality inflicted
upon Afghans who had done absolutely nothing against Americans.
A country already ravaged by years of war, famine and the Taliban
was bombed into the Stone Age and earlier, as hysterical jingoistic
Americans cheered on the horror. The U.S. government hired Afghan
warlords to track down whatever people in Afghanistan might have
had something to do with 9/11. Afghan warlords succeeded in rounding
up lots of people, many of them likely innocent, to hand over for
detention under U.S. custody in
exchange for a cash reward. The warlords failed insofar as Osama,
if he was indeed there, got away.
Operation
Enduring Freedom is the
new forgotten war. In fact, it also involved U.S. intervention
in the Philippines, now completely forgotten, where one American
died in combat and ten in training exercises. The U.S. government
now has a puppet regime in Afghanistan that barely manages to run
Kabul. Most of the country is ruled by warlords, including
elements of the Taliban, and the fighting and terror continue.
Right
after the beginning of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan,
Congress passed and Bush signed into law the gargantuan USA PATRIOT
Act, which significantly altered the relationship between the federal
government and the people with respect to civil liberties and due
process. The Act empowers federal agents to administer "sneak
and peak" searches of person and property without informing
the searched parties, and to distribute "national
security letters" to Americans, forcing them to disclose
whatever information the state wants and preventing them from informing
anyone else of their contact with the feds, under penalty of imprisonment.
The PATRIOT Act contains many other egregious provisions, including
the one used to sentence Canadian citizen Mohammed
Hussein to prison for his failure to correctly fill out the
paperwork for a state license for his money wiring service. Hussein
was the first person convicted under the Act, and the law punished
him retroactively, despite the ruling judge’s belief that he was
obviously not a danger or a terrorist but a rather innocent man.
Yet some Americans still believe the Act has never been abused.
Also
in the wake of 9/11, the government rounded up more than a thousand
individuals for overstaying their visas and other technical violations
of the law, depriving them of any rights to contact a lawyer or
to habeas corpus. Dozens of Americans were similarly detained on
"material witness" status.
In
December of 2001, the government nationalized airport security by
creating the Transportation Security Administration, an
organization with lots of discretionary power over the American
people but a pathetic record of dangerous incompetence. (For
a stark example of the organization’s ineptness, in 2003 the
TSA dragged its feet for more than a month before investigating
college student Nathaniel Heatwole’s e-mail to the agency admitting
that he had planted box cutters on two commercial airplanes as a
practice in civil disobedience to demonstrate the security flaws
in the system. To this day, the
absurdities continue.)
All
of these augmentations of federal power and assaults on basic American
liberty rammed through in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 were necessary,
we were told. After all, bin Laden was still free, and needed to
be caught, and if we would only trust the federal government with
some new powers, our leaders would do all within their ability to
bring the perpetrators to justice.
And
then the pretense began to seriously give way. In March
of 2002, Bush held a press conference during which he said,
"I am deeply concerned about Iraq, and so should the American
people be concerned about Iraq. And so should people who love freedom
be concerned about Iraq."
Yet,
when asked at the same press conference about Osama bin Laden, and
whether Americans can really feel safe until Osama is caught dead
or alive, Bush responded,
"As
I say, we hadn't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily
say he's at the center of any command structure. And, you know,
again, I don't know where he is.
"I'll
repeat what I said: I truly am not that concerned about him. I
know he is on the run. I was concerned about him when he had taken
over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically
running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.
"But,
you know, once we set out the policy and started executing the
plan, he became – we shoved him out more and more on the margins.
"He
has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we
find a training camp, we'll take care of it – either we will or
our friends will."
So
only six months after 9/11 and a full year before Shock and Awe,
Bush was saying he was "deeply concerned about Iraq" and
yet "not that concerned about" bin Laden. His partisans
made it clear, however, that Bush would catch Osama, and that all
we needed to do was give him more time.
Meanwhile,
the attacks on civil liberties continued. The government even put
an American citizen,
Jose
Padilla, into a military prison after a federal judge ordered
that the warrant against him be vacated since he had not been charged
of a crime. At the time of his transfer to a Naval brig, the government
claimed it had averted a dirty bomb plot with its new powers to
detain "enemy combatants" without a trial. Presumably,
the government would use its new powers to stop terrorism and maybe
even find the culprits behind 9/11. Padilla is still imprisoned
without due process. But where’s Osama?
Quickly
after 9/11 the Bush administration had begun floating the idea of
a
national program of Stasi-esque tattletales called TIPS, but
in 2002 Congress and the American people rejected it as just a little
over the top. The new Information Awareness Office, headed by John
Poindexter, similarly retracted a bit insofar as it
removed its particularly
unsettling logo from its website (and later changed its mission
from "Total Information Awareness" to "Terrorist
Information Awareness").
In
November of 2002, Bush created a new cabinet-level Department of
Homeland Security, ostensibly to better coordinate the old agencies
now absorbed under its fold. At the time it was argued that only
a new department could optimally handle a national emergency. The
agency is currently doing a fine job bungling up the relief efforts
in the Gulf Coast.
In
late 2002 and early 2003, the drums for war with Iraq exploded in
intensity and accelerated in tempo. The period was characterized
by hysteria over Saddam’s fictitious weapons program; the ridiculous
prospect, too flimsy even for bad science fiction, of being attacked
by Iraq’s unmanned drones (a fantasy which turned out to be a based
on a model made of plywood and string); and the notion that, in
the case of terrorism, only covering all the doorways and windows
with duct tape would protect us. The Bush administration pointed
to Saddam’s regime as evil incarnate, and worthy of being changed
from Islamist theocracy to a relatively liberal secular Arab state
– the opposite of what
ended up happening.
Organized
opposition to war with Iraq had more time to ferment than any such
dissenting response to the war on Afghanistan. Millions of people
in hundreds of cities around the world mobilized in the largest
mass protest demonstration in world history. Consequently, there
was even more childish talk of traitorous anti-Americans, allied
with The Enemy to destroy the United States. Both before and during
the war, protestors were compared to terrorists, terrorized by police,
shot
with wooden bullets, rounded up into "free
speech zones," spied
upon by the Feds and registered into federal no-fly lists. France,
too, became an enemy, and French Fries became "Freedom
Fries." Meanwhile, the government
was concealing its draft for a second PATRIOT Act – called the
"Domestic Security and Enhancement Act" and even far worse
than its predecessor.
On
March 20, 2003, after giving Saddam a final ultimatum to disarm
himself of weapons he did not have or face war with the largest
military power in world history, Bush launched a bombing campaign
against and invasion of Iraq.
By
the time the Iraq war began, most of the subterfuge that the government’s
main goal was to catch Osama was long gone. Bush stopped mentioning
the terrorist leader altogether in his speeches – although eventually
in a debate with John Kerry he
claimed that he realized that, yes, Osama attacked America.
The Iraq war became the "central
front" in the war on terror due to its supposed importance
in making Americans safer by making foreigners freer.
We
can very quickly recap what has happened since the government put
almost all its energy into Iraq. It has been two and a half years
since Operation Iraqi Freedom, originally
called "Operation Iraqi Liberation," began. Despite
the staggering death toll in the thousands for Iraqis, Americans
and others – despite the
staged fall of Saddam’s statue in Baghdad, the histrionic Bush
speech on the U.S.S. Abraham in front of that famous "Mission
Accomplished" banner, the confirmation that Saddam, just
as he claimed, had
no weapons of mass destruction, the contrived
discovery of Saddam in a rat hole, and multiple "watersheds"
for Iraqi democracy and self-governance from the "turnover"
last June and the
elections in January to the current deliberation over a Soviet-style
Constitution – despite all of this, Iraqis are obviously not
free, nor Americans safer, nor is al Qaeda diminished in its resources,
resolve and influence. On the contrary, war with Iraq has done precisely
what many of its critics had always warned: it has radicalized the
region and served as a
recruiting device for America’s enemies, most notably al Qaeda.
And of course it hasn’t produced the capture of Osama bin Laden,
who, as everyone should have known, had nothing at all to do with
the Iraq War.
The
war
against the Bill of Rights has continued, not
even taking a break during the last presidential election. We
will soon enough have a
national ID card. The dungeons in the far reaches of the empire
continue to exude the
tortuous screams of detainees, many of whom are very
likely innocent, even as government officials disarm Americans
in New Orleans and stuff them into auditoriums-turned-concentration
camps. At this point, the notion that America has brought down police
statism overseas is painfully belied by its
injection of police statism into Louisiana as a response to
a government-caused emergency.
Hundreds
of billions of dollars have been consumed in the policies known
together as the war on terror. Tens
of thousands of people have been killed, including two-thirds
as many Americans as died on 9/11; hundreds of thousands have lost
their loved ones, homes and livelihoods; and uncounted thousands
have been wounded or traumatized for life. Incalculable property
damage has occurred. The American empire is feared and distrusted
around the globe. Our economic solvency and civil liberties have
not been in as poor shape for decades. And we are no
safer than we were four years ago.
Even
if all this destruction and death had brought us the head of Osama,
it would be hard to justify it. Tens of thousands of innocents killed
is a mighty high price, even for such a noble purpose.
And
yet, where is Osama? He still hasn’t been caught. For such dismal
failure, the government might as well have done nothing after 9/11.
The same failure to apprehend Osama could have been purchased for
a much smaller price
in treasure, freedom and blood. If the government had reacted
with more focus and fewer indiscriminate invasions of American liberty
and foreign countries, just as some of us had proposed, there would
today be much less devastation – and if Osama had still not been
caught, we would be no worse off on that front.
On
the other hand, as long as Osama is out there, the war can continue.
Nothing is better for government growth than its own failures to
fulfill its supposed duties. Regardless of whether politicians and
bureaucrats want to fail, they have a systematic disincentive
to succeed in wiping out the very enemy that provides a rationale
for their power and aggrandizement. This disincentive comes into
play in all political pursuits, whether healthcare policy, education
policy or foreign policy. For politicians, it’s often better to
create more monsters to slay than to destroy the ones already out
there. This fact might help explain why only six months after 9/11
Bush said he was "not that concerned about" the man who
destroyed the World Trade Center, and has accordingly spent the
last four years waging war on the innocent people of Afghanistan,
Iraq, and the United States of America instead.
September
10, 2005
Anthony
Gregory [send him mail]
is a writer and musician who lives in Berkeley, California. He is
a research analyst at the Independent
Institute. See
his webpage for more
articles and personal information.
Copyright
© 2005 LewRockwell.com
Anthony
Gregory Archives
|