StormWarning’s Counterterrorism

In 103 days, we will reach the 7th Memorial of the attacks of September 11th, 2001. Since that day, many things have happened, and yet, many things remain unchanged. As we approach that moment, I plan to offer some of my observations on American life as it has evolved from that day, and to discuss a few trends that are bothersome. To those who may be offended by what I write, I am sorry. But you have either read too much into my words, or, rather, you see my words describing you all too well.

Who am I to write such things? Why, I am an American…I am a patriot…I am a man who now serves his country in ways that many others cannot, through my mind, my words and my efforts. Deny me that, and you make your first mistake…but alas, not your last. I am also a writer of note in my true embodiment, but write here anonymously to permit me the latitude of expressing thoughts and feelings that, as myself, would (or might) be inappropriate, and counter to my life’s goals. So, let us begin…there are the:

“Truth Seekers“: This group, as I define it, is composed of two very distinct clusters. The first, and the more amusing of the two, are those who continue to contend that the attacks of September 11th were either planned or perpetrated by the United States government on its own people, and that airliners did not crash into and enflame the two towers of the World Trade Center. These same people claim that a missile and not an airplane struck the Pentagon that morning (of course, belied by people, including a friend or two of mine who sat in traffic on 395 and saw the crash). But for the purpose of what, I ask? I suppose the answer is that the federal government needed to trump up a reason to go to war and wind-up that economic engine of the military industrial complex and to compromise the Bill of Rights in the name of the Global War on Terrorism. Of course, these people deny the eye witnesses who watched the planes hit the Towers…and they too, deny the live broadcasts that showed the airplanes striking the buildings. This component of the “truth seekers” is dangerous only because their hilarious approach to the tragedy leaves a few others, simpletons, asking the question of “if” the conspriacy theories are true.

The second element of the “truth seekers,” however, are much more devastating. Using the power of the Internet, they not only find support for their interpretation of the truth (feeding off of the random postings of other “truth seekers”), but then, by virtue of the power of their own ability to censor other people who might disagree with their version of reality, will both shut them down, stifle opposition and then resort to name calling of the worst order. Some even, in the best comedy since Jackie Gleeson and the Honeymooners, sling words that are not words, but which, by repetition, suddenly become vernacular. It is this second group who clamp down on, and then ridicule anyone who opposes their narrowminded views, that represents a great threat to the very country they contend they love more than anyone else. They are the Internet warriors. They claim patriotism and yet reject freedom of speech and deny any views but theirs have any merit.

“Pseudo-Experts“: Of course, this is a much more subjective supposition on my part. The blogosphere has spawned so many “experts.” It was written in US News and World Report when they announced the “Best Blogs of 2006” that there were lots of instant experts in counterterrorism. Well, there are some people who actually know about which they write (even, humbly, I present myself, despite the anonymity of Stormwarning’s Counterterrorism). There are others who suddenly awakened when they vicariously saw the planes crash into the buildings in NY City and Washington DC, and decided that they would begin commenting on the events of the day. This is not to suggest that people are not welcome to offer their opinions and observations. Not at all! That is not my intent. But from what perspective do many of these people write, except for the borrowed knowledge and information from others? In fact, there are a few who have emerged, even one very young yet wise beyond her years writer who offers a unique perspective on the world and world events, although through a filter of nomenclature that only recently was translated for others.

There are many, in fact, who write with a background in the military and in the intelligence world’s whose insights I read each day. Yet, one self proclaimed “expert” recently exclaimed that even when a true expert offers an opinion, in this case, debunking a Network report, that not until the “authorities” confirm or deny the reports, is it time to believe the true expert. Odd, but the contradictions are many.

In the coming days and weeks, as I have more time (if I can find the time), I will provide additional observations.