'Ask Questions Later'

4 December 2001

Most citizens capitulated to the dubious outcome of a disputed election because there was little else one could do and - for the sake of the country - we were told to ask questions later.

There was however an interesting reintroduction to a deeper patriotism. We asked questions about the roots of our country and we contrasted our answers to the rhetoric and policies from Bush and comapany. Something wasn’t lining up and what the rest of the world was seeing many Americans also began to see. Only fear and terror could put aside those questions and put the will of the people behind the besieged administration . Fear and terror arrived. All questioning ceases; George is given dictatorial powers and Americans are being tube fed a manic and pumped up sense of confidence. We’re going to be fine ­ we’re going to be fine ­ we’re going to be just fine. No question.

The war on terrorism offers an absolute evil for the population to rally against. It’s simple and unambiguous. Ambiguity is not something George has the patience, historical perspective or attention span for and he represents and promotes this feature in the American sensibility. He says it’s a new kind of war against evil. But it appears to be the same kind of war we've seen before against something much more complex. What we're watching we have watched before. A powerful military bombs a country that only has guerilla capabilities or an inferior militia. Many civilians are killed; rage grows; terrorism becomes the only weapon of reprisal. People will always organize to create chaos until there is no reason to organize and until chaos is no longer useful or necessary.

The comparison has been made between the war on terrorism and the war on poverty, the war on drugs and the war on cancer. It sounds macho and forthright but these “wars” are fictions that by the heat of their own declaration must ignore root causes and questions. The war on terrorism has a particular reason for ignoring root causes since whatever grievance a terrorist attack may be addressing instantly becomes off limits since addressing the grievance will be perceived as submission and reward. Asking why a terrorist attack happens almost implicates the person asking as an accomplice. Instead of being a dispassionate inquiry in search of a solution, asking why becomes tantamount to harboring a terrorist.

Bush and Sharon believe violence is necessary ­ they believe in an eye for an eye. They believe military action will bring peace. It has been said that if violence could bring peace, Israel should be the safest place in the world. We are told that terrorists are being killed in Afghanistan. There’s no way to know how true that is but it is safe to assume that out of this “new kind of war” terrorists are being born. The terrorists America needs to be concerned about may not be in Afghanistan at all. The cunning and committed terrorist is the one we need to be searching for. A fighter in Afghanistan is surely committed but he is most likely not a te rrorist and he is certainly not cunning. By definition a terrorist uses surprise and secrecy. The soldiers/operatives being killed in Afghanistan are openly fighting a military. That is not the action of a terrorist whose most important weapon is secrecy.

Bush, although not a fan of terrorists, is a big fan of secrecy. If one were suspicious, the accidental bombing of Al-jazeera in Kabul could be interpreted as a measure by which secrecy was secured. More blatantly, if secrecy can be blatant, the suppression of the Reagan papers, the need for military tribunals, his drunk driving record, the sources for his energy policies, the Bush bin-Laden connection, the Carlyle group and now possibly American casualties, are all covered with a veil. Several Pakistani papers are reporting sixty-five Marine deaths in Afghanistan. The official word from the Pentagon is there has been only one casualty. No word t hat will encourage the opposition or discourage the “shoulder to shoulder” pro war sentiment will be uttered from the Pentagon. Keeping the price of a military solution secret must be considered necessary for success. No one should ask how many soldiers have been killed. We are told they most likely will be killed ­ but ask questions about that later.

As veils are lifted in Afghanistan the veil in America gets tighter. Even America's second lady, Lynne Cheney, is making the rounds encouraging college “elitists” to cool the critical rhetoric and acknowledge and declare that they are outside the mainstream; ie admit your opinion doesn't matter - really. Prime Minister Sharon announced to the Israeli media that he was impressed at how well behaved and noble the Americans were in their capitulation to the war. He offered this as a great model for h is people. According to Sharon, Americans are the shining example of how to cooperate with a war and how not to be critical. Everyone be quiet and let the Bush/Sharon principle of bombing our way to peace have time to wo rk.

In a unified voice Bush/Sharon will say, “There will be plenty of time to discuss all this when we have peace. But until then, no questions please. Shoulder to shoulder please. Once we do the thing that you’re trying to be critical of then we can listen to your criticisms. But please ­ we know what we’re doing. We know how to make peace. We’ve been at it for years and years and years ­ and it will happen ­ make no mistake ­ there will be peace - we’re all dying for peace. No question about it - please.”

Bill C. Davis.
(c) Bill C. Davis.
http://www.billcdavis.com/