THE PLANECRASHING OF THE UNITED STATES
Copyright 2001, M. Mbulu All rights to everything on this web site are reserved.
[Home]
What the Response of the United States Should Be
Where Black People In the United States Stand
On Tuesday, September 11, 2001, several symbols of United States
military and commercial power were attacked, obliterated and badly
deconstructed. United States leaders and spokes persons have repeatedly
referred to how sophisticated and well-financed the attack was,
but there is very little about the attack that should be labeled
"sophisticated," and even less that suggests a lot of
money was involved. How sophisticated does one have to be to drive
an airplane, and how well financed does one have to be to purchase
airline tickets, take flying lessons or travel throughout the
country? The attack seems to have been well organized and executed,
but people of the United States are using the term sophisticated
probably because it would be too large a blow to the United States
psyche to admit that a simple operation by committed individuals
against the country that prides itself on being the only "world
power" could be carried out so effectively. What it indicates
is that the United States has fallen for its own rhetoric and
convinced itself that it is superior in all respects to every
other country and collection of human beings. The fact of the
matter, however, is that the United States' rhetoric and mythology
suggest powers that are far greater than its actual capabilities.
If the United States does not respond to this attack in a sensible
way, additional United States weaknesses will be exposed in much
the same way another so-called world power, the Soviet Union,
was exposed a few years ago. [Top]
Why The Attack Took Place
Anybody who has an understanding of the history of the United
States could not be surprised by an attack on the United States.
From its very beginnings, the United States has been as business
centric, anti-people and arrogant as any nation in history. I
made this point crystal clear in my recently completed and soon
to be published book, Mba Mbulu's An Introduction to White
History: The History of White America. Additionally, I have
published several articles recently in my newsletter, "The
Black Eye," that show how the United States continues to
act as if it is the master of the world and every thing else is
subordinate to it. In an article entitled "Power Is Shifting,"
I wrote that people all over the world despise the US and recognize
its hypocrisy and failure to participate in United Nations led
bans on land mines and resolutions recognizing every person's
right to food, clothing and shelter. People throughout the world
feel insulted when the U.S. ignores decisions of the International
Court of Justice and when the U.S. fails to submit the reports
on U.S. race relations that the UN requires it to submit. People
also note the United States' reluctance and refusal to limit its
use of the world's resources at a time when other countries are
eager to tighten their belts and be more resources efficient.
People all over the world know something needs to be done, but
mostly they have been waiting for Black People in the United States
to take a stand that will legitimize their questioning of United
States affairs and policies. Conditions, apparently, have reached
the point where people are tired of waiting.
I also wrote an article in "The Black Eye" entitled
"The World Is Changing." I made the point that people
are having so much trouble adjusting to the changes the United
States and western Europe seek because the collective energy of
HUMANITY is NOT bringing about these changes. A small number of
individuals who see the opportunity to make huge profits by forcing
everyday people to purchase new life styles and adjust to questionable
financial, cultural and political values are behind these changes,
and a lot of people are not willing to go along with them. When
they try to make their opposition clear to the leadership of the
United States and other European countries, they are ignored and
belittled. The frustration caused by this is enormous, so people
communicate their opposition in ways that are more likely to get
everybody's attention. [Note: This is clear on a smaller level
when one observes the processes surrounding the World Trade Conferences.
The powers that be make it practically impossible for those who
oppose the WTO to demonstrate in a meaningful way because they
are so intent on carrying out their program that they DON'T CARE
about anybody else's perspective. Thus, protesters have to be
"radical" just to make their opposition to the proceedings
known. WTO protesters are very intelligent people, and they are
no longer willing to play the "good citizen" role so
that a handful of business persons can make a lot of money. Intelligent
people recognize that they have lost control of their leaders,
and are left with the option of becoming accessories to their
leaders' crimes and excesses or the enemies of their "government."
Many are choosing the latter.]
So, what caused the planecrashing goes far deeper than the events
in the so-called Middle East. The United States' recent intervention
in the affairs of other people was probably the spark that led
to the blaze, but the historical and continued intervention of
the United States into other peoples' affairs is more important
here. the United States' support for Israel's massacre of Palestinians
and its bombing of the Iraqi, Libyan and Afghani people only add
to a pile of US arrogance that also includes the unjustified invasion
of and intervention in the affairs of countries like Grenada,
Cuba, Colombia, Panama, Hawaii, the Filipines, Puerto Rico and
so many, many more. [Top]
What the Response of the United
States Should Be
United States officials have stated that the attack was against
the United States' freedom, the United States' "interests"
and the United States way of life. They have also stated that
the attackers are cowardly perpetrators who have declared a war
against civilization and democracy. Again, the United States is
failing to represent the issues in a balanced way.
The attack was definitely against the United States' freedom and
way of life, but not in the way white and dark white citizens
of the United States present it. The attack was against the United
States' way of life because the United States is arrogant, rude,
ruthless and bloodthirsty. The United States' tendency is to disregard
the rights of other peoples, the United States modus operandi
is to impose its preferences on other people of the world, and
the United States' interests infringe on the rights of other peoples.
Leaders of the United States speak of their interests as if no
other people have the right to have different interests. When
we look at the issue of interests, it is the United States that
is the primary criminal party, the primary guilty party. Other
people have to be against the United States' interests in order
to protect their own freedom and way of life.
And continuing with the issue of freedom, other people are not
interested in attacking the freedom of the people of the United
States, they want the United States to realize that the freedom
of the United States does not include the right to abuse and force
the United States' way of life onto others. Let's be honest: the
United States' way of life is oppressive to people inside and
outside of the United States. There is a direct relationship between
the wealth of businesses and individuals in the United States
and the poverty of peoples in other parts of the world. There
is a direct relationship between much of the suffering of peoples
in other parts of the world and the political and business policies
of the United States. Some people have had enough and, unlike
Black People in the United States, they are ready to do something
about it.
If some individuals wanted to make an attack against "democracy,"
they would not attack the United States because democracy in the
United States is a myth. No intelligent individual will sincerely
talk about democracy and the United States in the same breath.
The issue of civilization deserves more attention, however, because
it suggests that people who radically oppose what the United States
attempts to do are uncivilized. That is definitely not the case.
If we were living in a civilized world, the planecrashing of the
United States would have to be considered an uncivilized act,
but the world we live in is not a civilized world. The world we
live in today is mostly the product of the United States and Europe,
nations that know little about civilization. If anyone should
bear the burden and label of barbarism and lack of civilization,
it is western Europeans and their descendants, particularly the
government and leadership of the United States of America.
Cowards? If the United States does not respond to the planecrashing
of the United States intelligently, it will become clear to people
throughout the United States that cowards would not attack what
is supposed to be the most powerful military complex in the world.
Cowards do not look death in the face and stay the course, as
the planecrashers did. There are some cowards, some "faceless"
parties, involved in this tragedy, but when those faces take form,
they are going to look a lot more like Americans than any other
nation of people. [Top]
The United States has outlined several areas around which their
response to the attack must revolve. In addition to beefing up
lax security at airports, the United States points to money, co-ordination
between United States intelligence and defense forces and the
enactment of laws that give legitimacy to the government's response
as keys. The United States is also trying to organize the world's
governments in support of whatever response the United States
deems necessary. In places like Pakistan, Iran and the surrounding
area, getting the verbal support of the government (how unreliable
that might turn out to be) is entirely different from getting
the support of that government's people. As soon as the people
in those areas put two and two together (which they likely have
already done) and conclude that this is, in fact if not theory,
an attack of Christians against Muslims, this event could take
on a character that defies limitations. Nonetheless, the program
proposed by the United States will produce some results, but more
than anything else it indicates that the United States still does
not understand that this confrontation is not going to be resolved
on the United States' home turf according to United States or
western European terms. If the United States does not respond
wisely, there will be a whole lot of destruction in the United
States and abroad, but that destruction will not eliminate the
United States' woes, it will add to them.
The United States can not achieve its objective by killing Osama
bin Laden because the hatred of the United States goes far beyond
bin Laden. Young and middle aged people around the world, on every
continent, hate the United States, many with good cause; and young
and middle aged people around the world, on every continent, do
not fear the United States. Some of them are willing to attack
the United States by any means necessary, particularly if the
United States continues to act as if it has the right to control
everything and flourish at the expense of other people's misery
and suffering. Nor can the United States achieve its objective
by launching military attacks against what they call "terrorists."
Israel has been throwing its military might against the Palestinians
for more than 50 years, and the Palestinians, with rocks and sticks,
continue to resist. Right now, Israel is in a more perilous position
than ever. And think about this: the United States can not be
any more destructive than the Russians were in Chechnya. When
the Russian offensive against Chechnya began, I said it would
not succeed. Russia practically destroyed an entire nation, but
that struggle continues; so much so that Russia's President Putin
is now seeking some form of compromise with Chechnya's leadership.
Oppressed people are not surrendering to intimidation anymore.
They have realized that they can control their destiny or die
trying, and more and more, people are demonstrating a willingness
to die trying. [Top]
If the leaders of the United States are thinking about sending
ground troops into Afghanistan, they're crazy. Russia is right
next door to Afghanistan, and I have written previously that the
collapse of the USSR was directly related to its attempted invasion
of Afghanistan. The terrain, the fighters, the frame of mind of
the Afghans, their amenity with privation and hard times, their
fierce independence and determination-- United States soldiers
have not been in a fight with soldiers like this before! The outcome
is not likely to come down to who has the biggest and most powerful
gun, but to who has the biggest heart and resolve. As Viet Nam
demonstrated, when the issue revolves around heart and resolve,
the United States comes up short damn near every time.
I can virtually assure you of one thing: the Afghanis will be
appreciably more lethal than the Vietnamese. Additionally, the
Afghanis will fight more based on their individual commitment
and hatred of the United States than their commitment to the Afghan
government. Many Afghans are opposed to the Taliban and would
love to see it destroyed, but when they see the United States
invading their culture, damaging their homeland and killing their
people, they will throw a form of guerilla warfare against the
United States that will produce a lot of body bags filled with
dead United States soldiers. The people of the United States are
screaming for war. What they had better do is chill and let cooler
heads prevail, or they might get what they are asking for.
One of the United States' big advantages up to this point has
been peoples' willingness to confront the United States on the
United States' terms. This gives the United States a huge advantage.
Now, people are beginning to realize that power must be opposed
by a power of different foundations and dimensions. That forces
the United States to do more adjusting, makes the United States
more vulnerable, and requires the United States to operate on
a "playing field" that is not slanted as much in the
favor of the United States. Under such cases, the odds shift noticeably.
What the United States should do is use diplomatic channels to
bring the individuals who carried out the planecrashing to justice
and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, ANNOUNCE TO THE WORLD THAT IT IS GOING
TO CHANGE ITS WAYS. If the United States does not make it clear
that it is going to change its ways, the legions of young men
and women who despise this country are going to give it more and
more hell throughout the 21st century and on into later centuries.
[Top]
Where Black People In the United
States Stand
In most of my books and writings, but particularly in Ten
Lessons: An Introduction to Black History and Not To Be:
Essays On Integration, I wrote about a developing new world
order. This new world order is being welcomed by non-whites and
non-European peoples throughout the world, particularly those
who want a world based on justice and equality to emerge. However,
because of the way Black People in the United States are visibly
supporting the excesses of the United States government and United
States business interests, progressive peoples throughout the
world are beginning to associate Black People in the United States
with the proponents of the badly warped old world order. White
citizens of the United States have benefitted mightily from their
crimes and shared few of those benefits with Black People. It
would be stupid of Black People to allow others to think that
We are partners and defenders of the United States. That would
place Us in line to be the recipient of part of the punishment
that white people in the United States deserve so much, and more
importantly, leave Us on the outside looking in at the new power
reality that is emerging. It would be stupid for Us to trade in
a prominent position in an emerging new world order for a Tonto-like
position in an old world order that has not only humiliated Us,
but is on the verge of being displaced.
"Within a white power context, Black People are not only
powerless, they tend to play the roles and games powerless people
have a tendency to play." Fortunately, the people who are
spearheading the new world order respond differently, more responsibly.
By playing the roles, particularly the public roles, the United
States demands that We play in order to "prove" Our
allegiance, We are losing Our legitimacy as a forward leaning
people. More and more, Black People are being identified as the
running dogs of white imperialists, and that is not good. People
are less and less inclined to bow down to the United States, and
this is proof of the US's decreasing power. Therefore, Black People
can more assuredly identify with the forces of progress, and should
do so. Unfortunately, We are failing in that regard, and it will
be costly to future generations of Black males and females in
the United States.
Some individuals, particularly Black People in the United States,
adapt to domination as if it were the weather. Fortunately, others
do not. [Top]
Some United States officials have raised the issue of its citizens
giving up liberties in order to better protect themselves against
"terrorist attacks." This is not only totally unnecessary,
it introduces a terrifying concept. The United States' openness
has nothing to do with people's ability to attack the United States
or any other country. The key to the United States avoiding attacks
from other people is this: THE UNITED STATES SHOULD STOP RUNNING
ROUGHSHOD OVER OTHER PEOPLE'S LIVES, CULTURES, VALUES AND INTERESTS,
etc. However, we must realize that the establishment of a police
state or something close to that is one of the objectives of the
present status quo. Instead of using this event to reform and
start establishing more equitable relations with the other peoples
of the world, the United States will attempt to use it to further
limit the liberties of everyday people. The planecrashing was
not predicated on the "openness" of the United States,
nor was it facilitated because the United States is an open society.
The planecrashing was made possible because the United States
is an oppressive society. The United States can be as open as
any society can possibly be and not be concerned about being attacked
if it deals justly with its own people and other peoples of the
world. So, if the citizens of the United States start giving up
liberties in order to fight against "terrorism," they
are making a critically serious mistake. [Top]
There is talk about the White House and Air Force 1 being possible
targets as if that is an abominable thought. Let's not forget
that the United States has targeted its own president (JFK, e.g.),
so why should foreigners be expected to respect the United States'
presidency more than members of the United States' white power
elite? Additionally, the United States has made a habit of targeting
the presidents of other countries. Who can forget the Ronald Reagan
directed assassination of the young, Black president of Grenada,
the bombing of the Libyan leader Qaddafi's home, the manhunts
for Saddam Hussein and Manuel Noriega, the numerous attempts to
assassinate Fidel Castro, the assassination of Trujillo, etc.,
etc., etc. Much of the time, such leaders had not done anything
but defend their country against United States aggression. Certainly,
when the United States leaders talk about targeting a president,
they are being hypocritical to the max. [Top]
The probable effort of the United States citizens in the plane
that crashed in Pennsylvania could be evidence of the strength
and heroism of the United States people, and the effort of the
people who have participated in the clean-up and recovery efforts
in Washington and New York are definitely so. But one feels driven
to ask where is this heroism and strength when it is time to control
the excesses carried out by their government and businesses? If
the people of the United States had fought against the excesses
of their government in the same manner and with the same strength
and heroism that they are displaying in the aftermath of the planecrashing,
none of this tragedy would have taken place. Quite to the contrary,
they are not only NOT opposing their government's excesses, they
act as if they are accomplices to it.
That brings into question the issue of innocent victims that has
been so often vocalized in the last couple of days. Are United
States citizens innocent victims, or merely non-military casualties?
If We look at this issue in a historical context, We see that
United States citizens watched and benefitted as their government
and businesses practically wiped out an entire population of Black
and Red so-called Indians, that they did so over a period that
spanned several centuries, and that they did nothing to force
their government to stop committing that crime. When the Native
Americans responded by killing United States citizens, were those
citizens innocent victims or did they get what accomplices to
the crime deserved? The same can be said of the enslavement of
Black People. For three, four hundred years, white people here
witnessed and benefitted as their country and business interests
carried out a crime that they knew was heinous and wrong, yet
they did nothing to force their government to stop committing
that crime. When some of the slaves rebelled and slaughtered as
many whites as possible, were they innocent victims or were they
getting what they deserved as accomplices to that crime? Remember,
United States leaders have stated that they will punish not only
the perpetrators of the crime, but those who harbor the perpetrators
because they share in the guilt. The citizens of the United States
definitely know that their country is committing and has historically
committed crimes all over the world, from Hawaii to Panama to
Puerto Rico, the Filipines, Africa, Asia and the rest of the world.
The citizens of the United States know that their country does
not have the right to bulldoze its way around the world and force
other people to run their affairs as the United States sees fit.
Thus, the citizens of the United States should be forcing their
government to stop acting in that manner, but instead they act
as their government's accomplice. When they suffer the consequences,
as in the case of the planecrashing of the United States, they
are just as likely to be non-military victims as innocent victims.
One final word: When citizens of the United States die, people
in the United States call them "innocent victims." However,
when the United States damages and kills innocent victims in other
countries, people in the United States only talk of "collateral
damage." That, again, is typical of the hypocrisy of the
United States, evidence of the hypocrisy of the people of the
United States, and explains why people inside and outside of the
United States will continue to despise that country so passionately.