http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_84-PT-REc4

Some comments on the video
Goes under the category of debunking the entire situation of the "war on terror." One has to do further research on the books mentioned and the persons involved but the concept of creating your enemy is nothing new, and as they point out, history of the the left in Italy or the ETA in Spain as an incredibly illluminating period for understanding the state's unabashed embrace for "terrorism" to scare its people into obedience and to delegitimized any resistance to it. The difficulty of the argument, which comes from the section posted below is that, at this moment, it would be hard to even recognize or name a "legitimate" anti-imperialist, pan-arab movement, so just what or whom is Al Qaeda deligitimizing? the Palestinian Struggle? What struggles are taking place that are so persecuted or underground that we have no awareness of?

Guy Debord already had the assessment down in the 80's in his Comments on the Society of the Spectacle:

IX.

This perfect democracy fabricates its own inconceivable enemy, terrorism. It wants, actually, to be judged by its enemies rather than by its results. The history of terrorism is written by the State and it is thus instructive. The spectating populations must certainly never know everything about terrorism, but they must always know enough to convince them that, compared with terrorism, everything else seems rather acceptable, in any case more rational and democratic.

The modernization of repression has succeeded in perfecting -- first in the Italian pilot-project under the name of pentiti [12] -- sworn professional accusers; a phenomenon first seen in the seventeenth century after the Fronde, when such people were called 'certified witnesses.' This spectacular progress of Justice has filled Italy's prisons with thousands of people condemned[13] to do penance for a civil war which did not take place, a kind of mass armed insurrection which, by chance, never actually happened, a putsch woven of such stuff as dreams are made of.

One can remark that interpretations of the mysteries of terrorism appear to have introduced a symmetry between contradictory views, as if there were two schools of philosophy professing absolutely incompatible metaphysical systems. Some would see terrorism as only several blatant manipulations by the secret services; others, on the contrary, estimate that it is only necessary to reproach the terrorists for their total lack of historical understanding. [14] The use of a little historical logic permits us to quite quickly conclude that there is nothing contradictory in recognizing that people who lack all historical sense can easily be manipulated; even more easily than others. It is much easier to lead someone to 'repent' when it can be shown that everything he thought he did freely was actually known in advance. It is an inevitable effect of clandestine forms of organization of the military type that it suffices to infiltrate a few people at certain points of the network to make many march and fall. Critique, when evaluating armed struggles ...

http://www.notbored.org/commentaires.html

see number 9 and footnotes at the bottom of the page

-gdr