The Logic of Terrorism

Olavo de Carvalho
�poca, October 6, 2001

It�s not hard to understand, if you can access the premises

In any terrorist mindset, there is some continuity between preparing the environment, carrying out the attack, and reaping the results. Communist jargon calls such attacks �armed propaganda.� The reason is obvious: the goal is not a specific military achievement, rather the spectacular display of whatever there is to be feared. To this end, agents must act with unarmed propaganda to prepare for, orient, and multiply the impacts.

The greatest outlay of armed propaganda of all times was cast on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon a few days after the unarmed propaganda show debuted on the other side of the world with the demoralization of Israel and the U.S. by the UN at the Durban Conference. After the towers had fallen, the mobilization to make good use of the results followed: a global campaign, punctuated by Fidel Castro, to single out the victim for the responsibility of the attacks and, the first time in human history, to denie a victimized country the right to react, pressuring it to hand over to the UN the authority to decide its national destiny.

The ideological identity of the scene directors in both shows, before and after the attacks, is very much the same: the International Leftists, entrenched in the UN and empowered by the exclusion of the U.S. presence in the Human Rights Commission. The primary premise and the conclusion of the syllogism are, therefore, much clear. Uncovering the secondary implicit premise is a simple task, but becomes complicated when so many voices, exploiting the congenial ambiguity of Islamic terrorism, dedicate themselves to underline its religious identity in order to cover up its political identity. Religiously, Bin Laden�s squad is part of one of the last vestiges of religious conservatism in the world. Politically, it sides with the International Leftist. If the political face of terror reveals the unity of armed and unarmed propaganda, by similar reasoning, the religious face distinguishes and separates them, camouflaging the secondary premise. This is why so many people in the press attempt to associate Bin Laden with Islam, which only has to lose with terrorist actions, rather to link him with the leftists, who have only to gain.

When Bin Laden said there is a plot underlying the war between the West and Islam at the benefit of Israel, he allows one to glimpse the truth in the bottom of all lies. The plot exists, but Israel can expect from this war nothing but its own destruction. As for the U.S. and Islam. The only ones to expect something better are the International Leftist. In fact, they don�t have to wait. Beating with the Islamic hand and, at the same time, pretending to befriend the victim only to manipulate their right to respond, they�re already winning by five times over: they escape the blame of unarmed propaganda, play one side of Judeo-Christian and Muslim conservatives against the other, receive new ammunition for additional press campaigns, win yet another round in its decades old battle to make the UN the global government, and push the debts of its monstrous global ambition on the U.S. account � all this, while staying out of the spotlight except to play guardian of peace. And never has the question Quia bono? (Who benefits from this crime?) been so eloquently answered. Some additional data may make this even clearer. Why hold a conference against racism in a country engaged in ethnic cleansing against a white minority if this exactly this issue were excluded from the schedule of debates? It seems absurd, doesn�t it? But there�s a method to the appearing madness. South Africa, ruled by a Communist party, has tight links to the Taliban and Cuba, headquarters of global terrorism. And according to Anthony LoBaido, one of the experienced correspondents in the country, the Durban elite is infested with Muslim radicals sympathetic to Bin Laden, including the police chief and local delegate of Interpol. The dissemination of unarmed propaganda could not spring from more fertile soil.