Al Qaeda may use Iraq operatives to attack U.S.

[Maggie_May]

We have been in there for 4 years and now the head line is Al Qaeda may use Iraq operatives to attack U.S. I find this funny after four years in Iraq we have accomplished nothing? We have found no WMD and now Iraq is a theater for al Qaeda to train insurgents and test the terror network's capabilities. Is this CNN head line a ploy to keep us in Iraq longer? I am to the point that I do not trust our top government intelligence. What really is going on here will we ever know the truth?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/17/nie.alqaeda/index.html

[blogslut]

1. Try Juan Cole

http://www.juancole.com/

[GeorgeGist]

2. Then Congress and Bush will just have to stay in Iraq.

Fish rot from the Head. I can smell them from here.

[MatrixEscape]

3. What is closer to the truth, IMHO:

What they call terrorism is nothing new. From the IRA to the subway incident in Japan, and on and on, there have been violent acts committed by various people and groups for various reasons.

Terrorism, as a word, is used more to instill fear and concern for safety by the very nature of the word itself. We have seen it become a very convenient, rhetorical hyperbole that has had more of an impact on our freedom and world affairs than the acts of terrorism themselves.

Defining a terrorist depends on who is defining it as much as the affiliations or agendas behind the act. Freedom fighters would never be called such by a repressive, tyrannical government, for instance. Calling them what they are would only lend credence to those who actively rebel.

The political use of the word and idea is what should concern us all here. That is what is what is really new about terrorism. The word, and idea, and events has done more to lubricate and accelerate sweeping changes in the way we travel, think, act, and look at our World. In that sense, (which I think trumps the acts themselves) what may or may not be false-flag events become more useful to the powers that be than to those who are using violence to react.

That is what getting to the truth is about, to me: If we continue to allow ourselves, (as a collective) to be distracted and befuddled, and even frightened, by all the dangerous bogyman lurking everywhere, then the over-emphasis and exploitation of those events will only serve to distract us from what is happening to us where we stand. Our culture has been overwhelmed with a very functional form of social engineering that has not only become a common, household word, (as if it where a name brand) it has served agendas that are not in our best interests at all.

Instead of losing our implicit faith in our government's ability to watch over us, (considering the insanely huge sums of money we pour into it and the military that allows for the best of the best that money can buy) we were instead distracted by our OWN FEAR as a people, (home of the brave?) and, conversely, gave even more power and control to that very system. Does that make any sense, after-the-fact? Are we that insulated from the fact that life is dangerous and that there will always be risks to take in living it? If you look at the statistics for how you might die, being in an fatal automobile crash is at the top and the odds of that happening would could make you think of a car as a tool of terror by today's logic, (tip: they hide in the glove compartment).

We need to be rid of terror and put these events back into proportion. Either a people decides to live in fear and yield to the tyranny that their governments are very prone to inflict as the price of a false sense of security, or they cast off the hyperbole and ask themselves if it is worth living in George Orwell's, 1984. So much has been done to erase the trail forged before us in the name of freedom that time is running out ... I mean, the second hand is ticking towards the mark that may actually be a point of no return.