Mervyn,

If you are interested in 9/11 academic studies, can I suggest that you have a look at http://www.st911.org/ It is a collection of around 300 US academics who share the views of Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed. It consists of engineers, physicists and humanities scholars.

If you can offer adequate explanations to some some of their concerns, particuarly regarding WTC 7, I would be very interested to hear it.

I agree there is a dilemma with endlessly looking for definitions concerning terrorism and consequently overlooking the most important element - that a terrorist act is essentially criminal behaviour and must be assessed and treated as such.

Nonetheless to ignore the underlying motivations of any criminal behaviour will limit our ability to comprehensively deal with the issue. Australia needs to be firm on building infrastucture, security apparatus and intelligence networks to prevent further attacks but must also be mindful of how certain foreign policies contribute to the liklihood of further terrorist activity.

No doubt the war on terror could provide rich pickings for academia and commerce alike. This has the potential to be a great sunrise industry.

Look how well NY Mayor Giuliani did after 9-11. Look how Mr Cheney's Halliburton shares have burgeoned too.

I am thinking of adding Wackenhutt to my portfolio just in case creepy old Uncle Phil throws me in the slammer.

On the other hand it would be nice to have a Minister for Peace, or even a Minister of She'll Be Right. Since you mentioned 1930's Germany, I suggest they could have used just such an arrangement to their advantage. It might have made all the difference in the world.

After all, the real terrorists and fascists of those days were the banking and industrial cartels who saw fit to invest in and enable Mr Hitler and the Nasties.

Shouldn't academia be pondering that one?

I agree with the need for more research into terrorism, its causes and strategies for risk management. I also feel that western governments are probably not going to fund it, or if they do, it will be like so many enquiries - have a very narrow scope.

There is no doubt in my mind that Terrorism is also serving these governments well, in taking citizens focus off the ever-increasing totalitarian policies being ushered in under the cover of Terrorism and Gradualism. ie the more draconian aspects of Industrial Reform, Civil Liberties.

In my view we face two distinct types of terrorism in the world today - State-sponsored and Islamic Fundamentalist. As one would expect, the latter is far more "honest" in it's intents and actions. The former relies much more on Stealth and Spin Doctors. Either way, we the citizens of democratic nations are destined to be the big losers! So, what alternatives do we have, particularly here in Australia. The Devil you know or the one you don't?

By the way, when was the last time you heard any politician refer to you as a Citizen of your country? Rarely I suspect, we are just "consumers" of all the spin they feed us, since governments handed over economic control of their nations to the Central Banking System (read Geneva and Brussels). The same "Royal" families and their Merchants of Venice now tell our governments how it is going to be! Just like the "good old days."

Charles

The rumble of big black limos disturbing the arcadian tranquility of downtown Carisbrook. G-men in dark suits and mirrored sunglasses trying to look inconspicuous in the thriving village of Carisbrook with its several hundred population. Maybe Uncle Phil has booked into one of the 3 tastefully decorated bedrooms at Keziah’s of Carisbrook, and how fitting is that; a restored former police residence. With Phil’s entourage and the need to double up in single beds I bet those G-men with a snoring habit were forced to pitch tents in Bucknall Reserve.

Chris, the next time you post a letter in that red brick post office at Carisbrook I’d remain circumspect if I were you. Uncle Phil might be out back steaming open your correspondence to that chemical company.

Merv, I agree with your description of Paul Kelly's analysis of the war on terror (Weekend Australian, 9-10/9) as "excellent", and encourage OLO readers to read it and your response (Australian letters, 11/9) in conjunction with this debate.

Just saunter in Sagey - the door don't even lock.

Here is the problem Merv. When we invaded Afghanistan and then Iraq the term "terrorism" became meaningless.

Do you think the innocent men, women and children of Afghanistan who had nothing to do with anything said thank you Mr US when the US dropped cluster bombs and food parcels together and they were both yellow? The US and we bomb in the night from 35,000 feet while people are sleeping, we use the worst of the worst weapons on them ranging from cluster bombs, napalm mark 77, daisy cutters which vaporise everything for miles around, depleted uranium. At least 20,000 civilians have been murdered with these weapons yet we never speak about them.

In Iraq the number is probably in the 100's of thousands - it was certainly 1.3 million from 1991-2003 during the sanctions. Even worse weapons were used here yet we only speak of the "horror" of the car bomb.

Not one car bomb was ever used in Iraq until 22 March 2003 when an Australian journalist, Paul Moran from Adelaide, was blown into a puddle.

In the US three buildings in 2 cities, 3,000 dead. In Madrid a train 192 dead, Bali 2 pubs 202 dead, Beslan 1 school 356 dead (most killed by the Russian army), the theatre where Russian army killed everyone, - hardly a massive crime wave that has affected the whole world or the whole countries which had these bombs.

In Iraq and Afghanistan there is hardly a town or city still standing whole and we did it.

Perhaps that is why so many academics in Australia refuse to maunder on about "terr'ism" - we are the terrorists in the 21 st century and I am sick to death of boys telling themselves ghost stories to claim otherwise.

Onya Marylin, well said

I don't disagree with the need for terrorism research but can understand some academic reluctance to doing it. For starters, there's the media 'problem' if word gets around you're a terrorism expert, then you'll find yourself front and centre doing sound bites for your institution, unless you're hopelessly tongue-tied. Then you'll have to deal with other terrorism institutions and I can think of nothing worse than wading through the spin of the AFP (re- the Bali nine) ASIO, the Defence Forces..you really would be setting yourself up for a heap of Howard Government/Canberra bureaucracy white anting. Marilyn lists all the big numbers argument, my cameo response would be how an academic terrorism expert would respond to the media call for a reaction to the ADF's complete exoneration of their Iraqi troopers who killed the Iraqi Government's Agriculture Minister bodyguard recently. Just as an example. Step up to the plate Mervyn, history (wars) awaits you.

Terrorism Research is not my field but what Mervyn says about the need for more research seems sound.

I do have issue though with his accusing other academics who take a dissenting view of somehow being in the thrall of “Stockholm Syndrome”. Other academics are likely to be as intelligent and well read as himself, they have just come to a different conclusion on the matter and have a different approach. It's usually regarded as healthy in academic circles to have different streams of thought out there.

In my former department we had two world authorities on human evolution who filled public forums for years for just the reason that they totally disagreed with each other. Not violently at all or things could have been very exciting, they were very affable about it, but they looked at the same evidence and came to different conclusions. Not once did one accuse the other of suffering from Homo Erectus cringe or Homo floresiensis rejection as reasons for their rejecting the others arguments....

But maybe I also are in the thrall of "Stockholm Syndrome". Dear me, therapy's expensive.

Also like Flezzy, onya Marylin. Back in 2001 just after 9/ll a group of us oldies in a Third Age class just happend to be talking on International Relations.

After the horror of 9/11 it seemed the time not to give lectures but to ask for opinions.

Certainly the first remark from a popular member of the group, was - "This should a be a wake-up call for America!"

It was so interesting that there was not so much shock among the group but more a murmer of agreement

We can well look back and think right now how unpopular the US had become, especially more so since the end of the Soviet Union and the Cold War.

Here had been most of us, even at end of the controversial Vietnam War, still enjoying scads of US TV feature films, especially ones on war featuring American as winners, or with winning smiles in ticklish occasions. But nowadays many of us oldies have gone off American humour, especially.

This is what we really have to look for, Mr Bendle, further we must say that you could not blame a looney-left wing fruity cake academia for all this, surely.

Bendle makes some pretty good points, and even though I'd consider myself a leftie, I think that there probably is an unbalanced view in academic circles that the west is entirely to blame.

On the other hand, the opposite view is firmly entrenched in the rhetoric of both the Labor and Liberal parties, so it balances out nicely - if I've got to have a government and an opposition that just compete to be 'tough on terror' I damn well want an academic circle that questions them.

One point though - the author refers to a timid response of European intellectuals to the rise of fascism in Europe.

Fascism came to dominate governments, and is what led to everybody's favourite comparison, the Nazi party.

I tend to think Bendle's comparison is erroneous. He has compared abuses by the state to abuses by non-state players (i.e. terrorists) all the while, denouncing the attitude that is comparing governments to terrorists.

So, lets rephrase that - the intellectuals of Europe didn't speak out against dangerous philosophies that were gaining prominence within certain governments correct?

Dangerous philosophies such as... the acceptance of torture? increased secrecy in intelligence operations? Legal modifications such as removing habeas corpus and the right to silence in terrorism related situations?

Actually, the european concerns were a little different, but these are different times. I'd argue the spirit is the same.

The author is simultaneously criticising the intellectuals for not criticising fascism in government while criticising present day intellectuals for doing the opposite.

Can't have it both ways I'm afraid.

You only have to look at history and the bombing campaign waged by the IRA for control of Ireland to see want terrorism is all about .

When America was talking about setting up a Democracy in Iraq before they invaded I said the thing that worries me about that are those big tribes there. One wont live under the territorial control of the other . That prediction based on my belief that man at the tribal level is territorial has proven to be correct. The Sunnis and Shiites are now more interested in killing each other than Americans for control of Iraq. I also predicted we would end up back in Timor because we hadn’t solved any of the underlying tribal territorial conflicts.

HITLER was an INSTRUMENT of the German people he was their smokescreen so that when the war was over they could say we didn’t do it Hitler did. There were six million jews displaced or exterminated in Germany. Those people had homes and cars and furniture and jewellery and bank accounts. WHERE DID ALL THAT WEALTH GO. I’ll bet the German soldiers had no sooner removed a Jewish family from their home then those same innocent German people quietly moved in and took possession. THE TERRITORIAL SPOILS TO THE GERMAN PEOPLE. The Germans were too intelligent to elect someone like Hitler without knowing what he stood for.

I just laughed when they said they had paid two British academics for two years to try and figure out why the homegrown suicide bombers would bomb London. TWO YEARS! I could have told them in two minutes. It’s a sample of things to come if one of these tribes doesn’t intergrate and gets big enough in numbers; of looming territorial tribal warfare. This war in Iraq has only bought it to a head sooner. I always knew the West would face a territorial challenge I just hoped it would be a few more decades away .

his blaming of the West for all the territorial warfare on the planet ignores the fact that all of mankind is territorial . There have been many conquerors (territorial males) throughout history from many cultures who have ridden in at the head of armies(territorial males), and taken control of other peoples land and countries. Usually enslaving the people and committing mass ethnic cleansing as they did.

The west who have tribal links going back to the Vikings and the Romans have indeed been successful takers of territory because of their superior weapons and military knowhow that’s why we enjoy just a prosperous life style today . We are also envied for our territorial wealth and that is why with all the young virile fighting males in these overpopulated countries we were always in danger of territorial attack . They know they cant take the great armoured Lion of the West in a head on battle. So they hit and run, hit and run, with these territorial attacks hoping to land enough wounds to bring the Western Lion down.

.They also understand the Western media very well and they play mind games with us which the appeasers grab on to like straws hoping that if only we can find out whats making them angry we can save ourselves. Don’t forget they are probably on the internet with people in Western countries all the time finding out the mindset of the media and public and how to manipulate that knowledge. If I was trying to bring down a superior power like the West that’s how I play the game wouldn’t you.

.

Where attention goes, energy flows. the more we keep talking about it, the more we will 'embed' it into our cultural lives. those at the top know this and eventually some futur3e generation will eventually jump, when the new nmasters of the day say 'jump'. terrorism will be the ruling elite's trigger - just like pavlova's dogs.

and the conditioning is already truely under way...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1867405,00.html

9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB ?

to all those who subscribe to this theory, please explain the video released NOT by the CIA, NOT by Fox news, NOT by any western mob, but by AL JAZERA...showing Bin Ladin WITH 2 of the Hijackers.

I can't wait Carl :)

P.S. be careful about anything coming from Brigham Young Uni, they also believe God is an Alien and that we will become 'gods' to other planets as 'God' is to ours in the future... and many other salubrious things. Onya Joe Smith, you really scored with those dissappearing gold tablets. (But hey, they enabled you to score lots of chicks... hmmmmmm)

SHARKFIN I think we have disagreed on a few things from memory, but I can't fault your present series of posts :)

KATRINA LEE KOO - huh?? or..'how to committ academic suicide in one sentence' by suggesting that the view "violence against 'the other'is a neccessary evil" is 'bad'. Yawn..another academic who failed prep, but must have known someone to get a well paid job foaming at the mouth. DUH... the safety you enjoy, and from which you WRITE this drivel is based on....wait for it...VIOLENCE and its also against the 'OTHER'.. which other ? (I should start invoicing for these consultations about the obvious) errr that 'other' who would rape you, steal your stuff, murder your kids, invade your country and if it was Ambon Indonesia grab an old dirty razor blade and CUT OUT your clitorus and hold a gun to your childs head until you recited the Islamic conversion prayers 3 times etc etc etc..... how much of a dimwit does one have to be these days not to "get" this ?

The mind doth boggle...still. The best description of this mindset was illustrated by my adopted dad during the still coherant but muddled days of Alzheimers... he wandered everywhere repeating the phrase "They're all idiots but us...they're all idiots but us" :)

Hey..SIAPADIA... indeed...siapa kah saudara/i ini yah ? nampaknya saudara/i berpengalaman di Indo ? Berasal dari Indo ? Ugama apa ?

Welcome to OLO anyway :)

Will someone turn UP the thermostat here in Melbourne... brrrrrrrrr...

Hi BD,

Most videos released of Bin Laden have come from Al Jazeera. The timing of this video, like the rest, was extraordinary. It came one day after Bush announced the presence of secret CIA prisions in foreign countries, and only a couple of days before the anniversary. Don't be at all surprised if another one emerges just before the mid-term elections.

I wouldn't normally make so much of the timing BD, except that the release of this video fits in with the usual pattern. One or two coincidences I can cop, anymore than that and you've got to wonder.

Regarding the Hijackers, I don't pretent to know who they were, and I don't think you should, the investigation into who was responsible for 9/11 was flawed by impartiality and it ignored crucial pieces of evidence. Oh but hang on, there was the passport of an arab that flew out of a burning building out onto the streets of Manhattan, of course! Proof positive!

Just remember BD my friend, I've never claimed to have all the answers, just a lot of questions

The academics on the ABC last night (was it the 7.30 report?) seemed to have a pretty good reason for not researching terrorism.

You can't do research about, or involving, humans without conforming to ethical guidelines and those are very strict. If there was any chance that research could involve risk to either the researcher or the researched it's just not on.

The new anti-terrorism laws mean that academics can't research without risk, so they can't research at all

Many defects in Bendle’s, otherwise passable, essay:

Australian terrorism information and analyses are usually classified. This creates:

- a limited group of current uncommunicative “insiders” at the coalface (ASIO, Police forces). Several Minister’s, DG ASIO and the Police Commissioners speak about their activities but often in a politicised way;

- a second group are former insiders, or people with access to insiders, who may be academics running terrorism courses, consultants still paid by Government or private industries, journalists (eg for The Australian) and the odd writers and bloggers; and

- the much larger group of uninformed “outsiders” including most academics who write about the subject. Bendle is unfair about this group because, compared to the US, security information in Australia remains tightly held. Academics usually find it difficult to say something original and intelligent on Australian terrorism when they don’t have access to intelligence.

Releasing intelligence in the interests of wider academic debate might only increase community tensions while also “telegraphing” delicate information collection efforts to the wrong people.

Rather than trying to convince sociology departments that counter terrorism law enforcement is a greenfields area for study it might be better that the activities of the terrorism studies centres at Monash and Macquarie Unis were expanded.

These centres (and several other university sites eg Murdoch Uni and UQ) already appear well informed - with a sprinkling of former insiders. If they were to take on more academics and graduate students, while extending their scope, this may raise the level of debate about Australian terrorism problems.

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com

Not so much taking notice of practicioners of spin like Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, Dick Cheney, and the neo-Con Zionists behind them - as the Murdoch Press might do, it is the Uni' academics who can give us the most truthful accounts of Middle East history since 9/11, and no doubt the real causes of 9/11.

Regarding the attack on the WTC, it is well to remember a statement by bin Laden not long after the 9/11 attack, not that he admitted organising 9/11, but he did mention his anger about thousands of American troops permanently established in his home state of Saudi Arabia. Further, as if admitting the mistake of having troops there, the Americans immediately withdrew them as they withdrew troops from Lebanon after Lebanese Islamics blew up an American barracks near Beirut, killing a large number of US marines.

If the above historical account can this day be proven to be true, does not this also prove a statement by Mubarek of Egypt a couple of years ago to a British journalist, that the major cause of Arab hatred towards the West, is Western intrusion and injustice in the ME that can easily be proven by history.

The more fertile ground for academic to study would be the psychology that has driven the reponse to what little terrorism we have been subjected to.

Not with standing the twin towers bali spain and london international terrorism is small fish when compared for example to internal terrorism conducted by the Tamil Tigers for example or in other civil wars over many years - it is a pissy little phenomenon when compared to the AIDs crisis facing Africa for example or hunger for that matter - yet in fear of our some what over valued lives we have spnet squillions to save a few more and reframed our legal system

Any escalation in international anti west terrorism has been primarily a reaction to disproportionate responses by the West to the TT collapse - Howard et al continues to refute that very simple fact for fear of looking like a geese - some one should tell them its too late.

If more rigour was applied to examining the now near universal paranoid psychosis the west is suffering from we might get a better handle on the problem -

the author really took too may words to tell us he was just pissed at the "left".

sneekeepete

I agree with most of what you say.

Discourse on security and intelligence issues in Australia is frustratingly based on the inarticulate Westminster tradition (of good chaps doing the unstated Right Thing - forcing me to talk to US "spooky types" instead).

I agree there is room to spread academic study into areas outside the study centres the author identifies. Not only psychology but mainstream politics and law courses could look at the 9/11 phenomenon, place of torture in interrogation and counter-terrorism laws etc.

I think the Western world's interest in al Qaeda style terrorism goes down to the facts that:

- 9/11 happened to America
- it was painted as a foreign attack on American soil, therefore the full force of America's security and defence apparatus was mobilised to fix this "foreign" threat.
- America lead the (largely) English speaking world into an invasion, then occupation, of Iraq and Afghanistan.
- non English speaking forces have largely indicated they want to pull out of these occupied countries. Perhaps most have.
- this leaves the US, UK, Australia, Canada and mercenaries as the main pillors of those occupations.

So I'd say unlike AIDS etc the counter terrorism push is a security and defence business. Its an enormous and growing business under conservative governments in the English speaking countries (let us forget little NZ).

I think the psychological element you point to is the instilling of immediate fear in our population to justify yet another far off venture of Australian forces.

Real reasons like paying a premium on ANZUS and long term government concern about China (with the US defending us from it) are, of course, never mentioned. I wish they were, but, good chaps and their US Republican bosses don't tell the truth.

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/

Hey guys n gals, lets get back to basics here, George Dubya announced his intentions back in 1998, that if elected to teh Presidency, he would launch invasions of Aghanistan, Iraq & Iran - presumably to reclaim US prestige in those areas.

Middle East instability is the bain of our European masters (G8, IMF et al) life, and most western and Asian cultures - we are all so dependant on oil. We are, literally speaking, being held over the proverbial oil barrel by Mid East instability - not am entirely new phenomonen - during WW2, the great battles waged in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and even Syria, were about denying the fascist enemy access to the mid-east oil fields.

It would appear that 9/11 was a most convenient attack on US soil, giving Bush just the excuse he needed to establish his war footing and, it would seem, an opportunity for the US to once again have a major military base in the mid-east - something lost when the Shah of Iran was deposed in 78-79.

Make no mistake here, the US and Australia are part of the New World Order's internationqal police force (Sherriff George and Deputy John). Who is the One World Govt first propogated by one Lord russell of Liverpool back in 1947 - I believe it is G8 and the Euro Union - they have the backing of the Hapsburg financial empire and its modern day disciples, including European royal families (with the promise of regaining their feudal empire thrones, and teh faceless, namelss gnomes of Zurich merchant bankers, multinational business empires who are answerable to no national govt. Instead so-called free-world governments are now answerable to these global conglomerates.

Why - we, the borrowers are subservant to the lenders! 80% of Australia's currency is owned by Japan, China, Saudi Arabia, London, Zurich, Brussels, The Hague etc. If you think that is bad - the same people own 90+% of the US currency. How did this happen? Easy, in 1973, One World Govt devotee Henry Kissinger persuaded Nixon to float the US dollar

Ten years later, the "world's greatest treasurer," our own Paul Keating, floated our dollar, like most western democracies. In a short period of time, our respective country's economies were devalued by up to 50%. Governments had to borrow big time and we became the tails, rather than the heads of our own nations and destinies.

These same bankers, financiers and royal families, almost without exception, financed Mussolini and Hitler - they saw fascism as the way to go, bringing free citizens back into serfdom. Even the King of England, Churchill and many US industrialists.

Globilisation is NOT about bringing Third World countries up to Western strandards, it is about bringing Western nations and free people to heel - bringing us DOWN to Third World standards! Make no mmistake, and teh double bind is this - voting Liberal or Labor won't make any difference - they are all servants of their European masters. The downward slide, sadly, is looking irreversible.

I see the problem, but what is the solution? Journalists & academics are dependant on those currently in power, for their daily bread and butter - if they buck the system, ask the hard questions, or go public, they will starve or be looking for another career. Proposed defamation laws, industrial reform and the new boys network all conspire to keep their lips sealed.

It may be a new methodology, less brutal than Hitler, but it is all the more effective - and it is still FASCISM - I call it Neo-Fascism. Neo-Conservatism is too mild and inocquous a term. They have us where they want us at the present time and there seems little we can do about it.

I fear, the world has already begun to enter a new Dark Age. Where are the protestors against the war in Iraq and other of Bush's meglomaniacal plans? We need to expose these demagogues, a groundswell of opinion as happened during teh Vietnam War.

Well folks, that's my 24 hours worth!

Interesting posts flezzey, I don't know if I agree on everything you say but you are certainly looking at the big picture. When analysing the 'war on terror' the media and forums like this get infested with muslim bashing or very empty analysis of the afghani/Iraqi front. What is so often forgotten, is the wider geopolitical goals of the US and Europe in this region. Pipelines to the Caspian sea, trade routes to Europe and a permanent military presence on China's western border is what the 'war on terror' is really about.

BOAZ,

I urge you to view this video

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3117338213439292490&q

While I beleive you are very well informed individual, I think this video could really open your eyes, it certainly did mine. You seem to place a lot of emphasis on the psychological mindset of Islamic terrorists. Think about the issues discussed in this video and ask yourself if fundamentalist Islam really is the main issue at stake here.

Cheers.

Bertrand Russel first coined the phrase "Coalition of the Willing" in 1947, as his solution to bringing errant world states like Iraq, Nth Korea into line (eg Iran, Nth Korea, Iraq etc and us, if needs be!)- he proposed a "coalition of the willing" as being a multi-national force formed from armies of countries sympathetic to his One World Govt idea - ie a World Police Force. Sheriff and Deputy!

Russell built on the ideas and ideologies of earlier philosophers like Huxley, HG Wells and others. They came to teh conclusion that the only way to world peace was a One World Govt with member states. This is the origin of phrases like Global Village etc - it is supposed to appeal to the public, suggesting we help poorer nations improve their standards of living. In reality it is quite the opposite - it is designed to bring the rest of us back into SERFDOM.

The apparatus of One World Govt is G8 - the individuals behind the countries involved, control most of teh world's agriculture, financing, shipping, production/manufacturing, through finances. Other apparatus is the World Bank, IMF and the so-called Central Banking systems of member nations like USA, UK & Australia.

The Central/Reserve Banks sound very official and are dressed up to look like responsible govt agencies but the most casual examination reveals they are tools of the European Oligarchy of financial interests and One World Govt - they are NOT accountable to the citizens of their country nor their government - to wit recent interest rate hikes here in Aust - that were totally un-warranted and even no0ur own govt says so!

Flezzy

While your essay above indicates a good grasp of the history of ideas and organisations it appears to vindicate Bendle’s main point that there has been a scandalous lethargy among the Australian intelligentsia in terrorism research.

The tendency of the "intelligentsia" to get sidetracked into 9/11 mythology and an academics particular pursuits suggest that terrorism research (particularly concerning homegrown terrorism) should remain in academic bodies that include staff with a security or intelligence analysis past. Naturally the more classified end of terrorism research continues to go on among ASIO and ONA analysts.

So after equivicating I'm swinging back to the idea of keeping terrorism research within expert institutions.

Sociologists (Professors or otherwise) and reformist lawyers appear to see terrorism research as an anti capitalist, anti Western and anti authority research opportunity.

I think they forget, or are oblivious to the fact that compared to the West, Russia, China and India are much tougher in terms of counter terrorist laws. These 3 countries also use extra curricular, extra legal methods of coercion and revenge (including torture and summary execution) against terror suspects (usually Muslims).

Although it may be against the principles of many academics to admit it, I think, authorities in Australia give terror suspects a fair go by world standards.

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com

Pete,

On reflection, you may well be right here, and I support Bendle on the study of terrorism, apart from political ideologies. The problem as I see it is can studies undertaken by government agencies, even universities dependant on govt funding, publish both sides of the picture? In other words all we may get is a sanitised western view.

This appears to be the political climate of our nation and, even more so, the USA at present.

Bendle's accusation of treason is a bit strong but they are certainly letting down the citizens of our nation by remaining silent.

Then again, have they been gagged by Chancellors desperate for funding? It would not surprise me. Political ideologies could well influence their research one way or the other, but we do need greater research, study and debate.

Sadly our politicos have pretty much polarised debate. As George Dubya said on the site of the Twin Towers, you are either for us, or you are against us. A simple, manipulative political ploy and we (US and Australia) fell for it, as if there were no middle ground. Two choices.

I know I am seen as something of a traitor by some of my old war veteran mates, and within the church, for daring to take the middle ground.

Anything that contradicts Howard or Bush's line is deemed as un-patriotic and even treasonable. Hence I can identify with academia and the media's reluctance to speak out. Things are very emotive, even hysterical, out there, though I still believe academia should be taking a lead.

Another issue I see is do the public want to know? I fear not, "just leave me alone to get on with my job and raise my family. The education system and mindless media drivel has dumb-downed the bulk of people - they are simply not interested. Instead of the predictably complex answers seriouos study is likely to find, people in the street just want little quips and one-liners to feed off. Murdoch has made sure of that.

Flezzey

I think money, contracts and reputations will always influence the output of intelligence analysts BUT academics as well.

A frustration I have with sociologists or philosophers trying to approach counter terrorism issues is that they often just harp on the universal questions that are part of their discipline. For example they ask:
- do you need security services in today's society?
- should identified terrorist groups be given a forum for their grievances?
- prove that security services are not the presumed thought police of society?

From these humble beginnings comes nothing new and the public just assume its a bunch of leftys ranting – and return to making money (as you say).

What complicates your picture of government paid onesidedness is that:
- intelligence analysts ARE frequently leftwing, some of the better ones go further, preferring anarchism. This makes their analyses different and in conflict – which means a better argued result.
- Intelligence analysis agencies rely on academics passing through (on multi year contracts) or stopping there permanently to provide the necessary expertise and diversity.

Some of these people go on to the Monash/Macquarie centres Bendle refers to. Basically they’ve seen the spook bureaucratic world. They know what value to place on classified streams of information and they are now slightly less constrained on what they say. They can also talk to all the types on campus etc.

So, I think, an expansion of the existing interplay between academia and intelligence agencies is preferable to “novice academics disciplines” reinventing the wheel in the counter terrorism area.

Flezzey in the absence of any other former insiders writing on this string (if not in all of OLO?) you’ll have to take on trust and skepticism my personalised/dated(?) account of the Australian intelligence world. If it was the US we’d have many more ex (or current) insiders voicing their opinions. Then again you could read my blog.

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/

Thanks Pete, I was not aware most intel analysts were left wing. Wasn't that way when I was in Defence up at Fort Fumble in Canberra (Malfunction Junction!) I did find a deplorable apathy and sense of little boys playing big games in some circles; indeed was able to make some difference in one area of security that resulted in a senior officer being "retired" prematurely and his position upgraded to reflect the seriousness of the situation.

I was part of a team tasked with investigating security breaches at the time, but that was 20 years ago. We found cultures and attitudes among leadership were the real issue, rather than a lack of skill or knowledge. The rot started at the top, in this instance.

I shall visit your website tonight. My postings are more about public awareness of the current issues under discussion, not just within academia, which digresses a little from Bendle's argumenty, but I think we are of similar minds about that.

I have the deepest concerns about the public disinformation campaign, and distinct lack of information among the citizens of our nation, with regard to US plans. Where are the independant voices and how do the public get to hear them? And i f they do, then will they care, or are they happy with the status quo?

I agree whole-heartedly with your comment re people thinking some of the acadameics just left-wing loonies. As you say, their language and limited view is too familiar and out of place with the younger people of today. It is these people we must inform, if we are going to make any difference, in a so-called democracy. Their votes are the ones that will make the difference, in my humble view.

Thanks again Pete, talk later

Pssst - don't mention the 'War'.

5 years on, & what have we achieved? Greater dividends for the shareholders of Raytheon, M-Sorft, Genral Dynamics - the list goes on... We've all but given up on the civilian body counts in the countries subjected to the WOT. A milestone of military casualties in Iraq now puts US deaths above the 9-11 toll of the day.

Academic research into terrorists/terrorism/terror per se... well most of the real work was done in the '80's for those in the know.
The CT group par excellence (Special Air Service Regiment) developed and set up most of the current doctrines and response mechanisms nearly 25 yrs ago. They have fortunately evolved with the threat(s) apparent. The various state & territory jurisdictions have adopted complementary roles within their police forces - but are they really adequate if the 'manure hits the fan'?

The only significant research articles relative to our region of late, are texts originating from our Asian neighbours efforts to analyse and dissect the rise in Islamo-Fascism. Funnily enough as a 'Navy brat' in the mid/late 1960's, I listened to crusty old CPO's warn of the real & dire threat of Indonesia. These blokes were no mans fool's regarding their on the ground 'intel' (HUMINT) for want of better terminology. And yet today our own ADF fete their Kopassus troops on so called 'exchange exercises' - much to the chagrin of the Bayonet Men at Campbell Barracks.

Hmm... sounds again like someone's given Josef Mengele the keys to the creche me thinks....

Regional appeasement to the enjoyment of the corrupt Indonesian regimes.. Papua - MERDEKA! Across the border in PNG the spectre of AIDS gets no political profile, yet we can deny refugee status to those in real need of its umbrella.

Sad indeed are the coming days of Australia's visiting inhumanities and human rights abuses upon its near neighbours. History taught our political figures no lessons in Timor (1942, 1974, & 1990's.)

Even more tragic will be the perception management and collective political myopia evidently clouding any clear vista of the road ahead.

Bravo Alby, once again!

I was a Navy CPO training Indons in Indonesia in the 70's and 80's and said to one of my skippers once, "don't like this Sir, gonna copme back and bite us on the bum one day!" His reply was "I know Chief, however ours is not to reason why, but to do or die." He later became an Admiral but was probably more in bondage to his political masters than ever, by then. Though I did note his early retirement and disatisfaction with Navy and Defence in that post - we remain friends after 30 plus years.

Many uniformed people in Defence see the stupidities of our policy and atrocities of Indonesia and various SE Asian and African regimes, but who will listen to them? The mores enior our officers become the more they are gagged - if you want promotion keep your mouth shut and toe the line.

By the way, I served in PNG and Irian Jaya during teh mid-late 70's - and witnessed Indon atrocities on one occasion. Also saw how they operate at first hand, in many other situations.

In teh end, I saw we were being used as ineffectual tools and defacto oppressors by our political masters and resigned.

Flezzy - maybe you were one of those crusty ole bastards at the HMAS Tarangau/Kuttabul CPO's mess all those moons ago? I think not, but as you say our bums are bared under current 'pollie waffle'.

It scares the beejeezus out of me to know the Kopassus have intimate knowledge of our tactics and to some extent our doctrines. They have a dark and very chequered past. Bad move all around! Remember the Japanese geologists who mapped out remote airfields, naval approach routes, and tactical stuff like that in 1935 to 1937 'surveys' up in the Kimberley, East Arnhem Land and other spots in our north prior to WWII.

Speaking of incursions, just how many of the recent illegal fishing forays from Indon 'civvies' is actually that? No one has even begun to deconstruct or analyse the intel there. I have just this week returned from 6 weeks on oil platforms in the Timor Sea. Some of the stories you hear from long time worker there...

Without sounding alarmist, the intel that gets 'lost' & falls into the wrong hands is astounding, both here and within the TNI forces.

Many old Diggers, & Pussers of that era still warn us today. Who listens - no one. Having on several occasions been in the various "Black Rooms" it is a sobering, and at the same time, enlightening experience to witness the abject stupidity of the Military Intelligence machine - now there's another oxy moron...! The policies of the day dictate unfortunately. Hmmmm...how to bring about policy changes...?

In their defence though, there are still many good operators in the system - I just hope good sense and CDF prevails if we do get another Bali or worse incident on our doorstep.

Nice to hear you and your old 'Skipper' still keep in touch.

Cheers mate!