TWA 800 - Terrorist Cover up? - "The Media Makes Terrorism Possible and Profitable" By: Thomas Hinckley, MA, Ph.D., MIOP Former Air Force Academy Instructor, retired Brigham Young University Professor

Julien Benda, a French Philosophical writer, argued at the opening of the 20th Century that the intellectuals were guilty oftreason because he believed the intellect ought to be devoted to universal spiritual truth rather than pursuit of political power or racial dominance. (Trahaison des Clercs). As the 20th Century closes even political power fails us. We keep passing legislation against terrorism. We try sanctions. We throw money at the problem through high technology solutions. We limit the civil liberties of law abiding Americans. All fails. Why? Why do men turn to terrorism?

The Media makes terrorism possible and profitable. It would seem that terrorism is the court of last resort. In a century that is reported to have had 175 million violent deaths (not counting abortions) it might be supposed that a few more violent deaths would be mostly unnoticed. Why should military personnel matter? Were we not always called "cannon fodder" - even to our faces? Why should a death in downtown Atlanta, Georgia generate worldwide banner headlines because the Olympics were there? Downtown Atlanta experiences violent deaths nightly. In fact, the night the pipe bomb exploded in Centennial park, according to one person in the security business in the area, there were fewer than usual injuries and deaths in downtown Atlanta.

Terrorism is a method of expression, used historically by the frustrated, angry, but politically powerless people. From the point ofview of Louis XVI, the French citizens who stormed the Bastille and eventually beheaded him, were terrorists. Today, the Media makes terrorism possible. The terrorists make their point, and the secrecy surrounding terrorism keeps their story alive through wild speculation by those looking for a story. If there were no media, terrorism would lose its power.

Throughout the Vietnam War I was reading the Top Secret file every day, as well as the newspaper. I quickly learned that whatever was going on in the world, the media seems to be the last to find out about it. Fortunately, the American public is beginning to learn the same lesson. The mainline liberal media is no longer reporting. They are engaged in social engineering. While no one argues against "freedom of the press," most Americans now realize that editorial policy has destroyed the freedom to report what is really going on. It is the media - particularly the dis-information and sound-bites of television - that makes it possible for terrorism to be so effective. The fact that a growing number of Americans have seen through this charade and are moving away from the elitist media is encouraging.

Special-Interest Legislation.

One only has to read the Congressional Record to realize that almost all of the legislation passed in the last decade is for special-interest groups. The notion that legislation should be for "the common good" of all has been lost. Throughout the debates on the budget, health care, on education, on appropriations - the floor debates seem to usually reduced to legislating AGAINST one group . . . the "rich," the "healthy," the families who scrimp and save for their children's education, in order to provide free services FOR the "poor," the "sick" the children who grow up on welfare, etc. This has engendered contempt for governments at all levels.

Justice.

In a larger sense terrorism exists in our world because justice no longer exists. The terrorism of the angry mob took over in Paris because there was no justice for ordinary people in eighteenth century France. Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence charged King George III with having "obstructed justice'' and buying off judges through "payment of their salaries." In English Common Law, a trial lasted less than three months. When someone was arrested, the Crown had until the next quarter session to bring the case to trial and the trials were speedily dispatched. Courts were not clogged with money-making litigation. A man had a right to a speedy trial.

This is no longer true in America. Our present corrupt legal system protects the guilty and persecutes the innocent. A recent study concluded that the Miranda Clause has resulted in the greatest setback to criminal justice in the last 150 years. So, in response to a collapsing justice system, we have unabombers, militias, urban terrorism, public school terrorism, religious terrorism, international terrorism, and military terrorism. Fortunately, within this assessment there also is a clue for solutions.

Swift Justice -

Not only is justice needed - it needs to be swift justice. Have the perpetrators of the Lockerbie bombing been brought to justice? Did we say, "Turn over these individuals or we will consider it an act of War?" "One would have expected something better from martial justice in the cases of the bombings which killed Americans in Riyadh or Dhahran in Saudi Arabia. Admittedly martial law has a bad record in the USA, but as things are going its over-severity seems preferable to corrupt criminal law. What about the World Trade Center bombers? Has the government stated that ifthe TWA massacre proves to be a result of a missile attack that the USA will consider it a violation of our sovereignty and thus an act of war and will declare war on the country responsible? Can we really tolerate "peace at any price?" What has happened to the Oklahoma City bomber? It has been more than a year. What is happening to the unabomber? Once upon a time we bombed Libya and sent an incontrovertible message to the world. Can we remember any terrorist in the western world who was swiftly brought to justice in the last decade? No. While, at this writing, there is considerable discussion in Europe about HR 3953 - the quickly passed and signed Aviation Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1996 it is more a presidential campaign plank than anti-terrorism bill. For example, it merely sets up a commission on Anti-Terrorism, increases penalties under existing law for terrorist related convictions and urges the president to exert "diplomatic" pressures against nations which have "repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism." It also provides funds for "sniffer dogs" who can find non-metal bomb devices in luggage to be deployed to the 50 major airports. That is probably the most effective part of the bill, and I doubt that there are enough dogs in American to sniff through the mass of baggage and millions of pounds of cargo at America's airports each year. Solutions Need Moral Leadership - Of all forms of terrorism, the most reprehensible is the least discussed by our media - public school terrorism. Each day in this nation, millions of small children are forced by state law to subject themselves to terrorism in and about our public schools - drug dealers, gun toting fellow students, violence which maims and kills because of the clothes they may be wearing. In such an environment, education levels steadily decline. Yet, the solution is simple. Ah we have to do is repeal the mandatory schooling statutes and eliminate lawless elements in and near schools. Even that great liberal, Senator Kennedy, admits that the literacy rate in Massachusetts has steadily declined since the introduction of mandatory schooling. Since public school terrorism is part and parcel of urban terrorism, by halting public school terrorism we could also reduce urban terrorism. We could solve our drug problems if we attacked them with the same force, determination and vigor with which the ATF and FBI attacked a small, isolated religious community in Waco - the Branch Davidians. (Of course, as it turned out, they didn't even have any drugs, which was the Justice Department's excuse for calling in the military and destroying the building with a tank.) Today, the Branch Davidians who opposed that raid are serving a cumulative 240 years of prison time. Could we not use these same tactics on the drug lords of Los Angeles? If not, why not? Are we in fact attempting to fight corruption with corruption - which of course will never succeed. We could close the Mexican/USA border tight if we could get greedy Americans to agree to forego cheap Mexican labor or sales to Mexican border-crashers. But, first we have to agree about what the problem is and what should be done. The lesson of vector analysis is that two equal forces acting upon a body in opposing directions result in a net movement of zero. As long as the drug lords are able to get through our border without a force superior to their efforts to sell the drugs at a huge profit, naturally our cities will be awash in illegal drugs.

We have for the last couple of decades pushed the concept of management - especially management from Washington, D.C. The result is disaster. All the European military commanders were fired because of the death of Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown in Bosnia. Yet, this "one mistake and you are out" rule now employed by military management is certainly not employed in the civilian community of Washinton, D.C. In both the military, and in our civilian law enforcement, management from politicians is destroying the ability ofboth the military and the police forces to protect the lives and the safety of the American people. Increasingly, law enforcement and military matters are determined by micro-management from the White House. This is effectively paralyzed any real, or any swift, response to terrorism - foreign and domestic.

Trained Security - Secretary of Defense Perry in a recent speech pointed with pride to his decision to put all military personnel in Saudi Arabia on an isolated, pricey new base out in the desert. This is typical of the decisions made in Washington today. It was not a military decision. It was a decision made by a professor-turned bureaucrat. What is the military affect? We will be placing our troops in the center ofa very handy, isolated target for terrorist bombs and missiles. Now the Arab terrorist will not even have to worry about an isolated Arab brother or two being killed by mistake.

The only way we are ever going to protect our troops overseas is to have highly trained security people. We never had a nuclear weapon stolen from a SAC base. We had nuclear devices in the air around the clock for over 40 years without a major incident. Today's decimated military could not equal that kind of proficiency.

The most important part of maintaining security, in and out of the military, is trained personnel. Technology is secondary. The initial PBS radio report which I heard on the Dhahran bombing indicated that the enlisted security man knew instantly that something was suspect when he spotted the large truck and the getaway car. None of the subsequent reports even mentioned this. If we had a SAC type security force - well-trained, adequately manned and aggressive, the trucks would not have gotten into the critical area in either Riyadh or Dhahran.

We have used cuts in the military to cut the budget, rather than to protect the security of America. We are beginning to pay the price. More than 120,000 of the "reduced federal workers" which Bill Clinton says have resulted in "down-sizing federal government" are in the military. They are not "government workers." They are military personnel. There is a direct connection between Clinton vetoing of the military appropriations bill that would have beefed up our security forces, especially protection against in-coming missiles, and the increase in terrorism. Well trained personnel, not safety glass, road barriers and other techni-fixes, is the solution to the growing terrorism problem.

Why are terrorists so successful? Because high-brain/low-tech can almost always beat high-tech/no- brain. We are staggered with the simplicity of launching a Stinger missile from Long Island Sound Could the TWA 800 Flight been brought down with a Stinger missile? Well, today's Stinger missiles, which we have made available all over the world, have a range of up to 20,000 feet. TWA 800 was at 13,500 feet. Could someone with a shoulder fired Stinger have brought down TWA 800? Yes. And, some eye-witnesses said they saw something arcing up towards the plane just before it exploded.

During the Vietnam War, the political managers said that the military is an instrument of national policy, not a force to protect our nation. So, the generals had to get permission from the politicians for every move. And "Charley" (Viet Cong), outsmarted the politicians every time in spite of our technological advantage. On the other hand, in Desert Storm, George Bush allowed the military to make military decisions. The personnel was much the same. Nearly all the line leaders in Desert Storm were military men who also were in the Vietnam war. The difference? Desert Storm was a total success - and the fighting lasted a few days. Vietnam was a total failure and the fighting lasted a decade.

We are now trying to solve our growing terrorism problem like we tried to solve the Vietnam war - with political, not military solutions. Throwing money at terrorism, or to try techni-fixes is about as effective as pouring sand down a water-rat's hole. If we want to combat terrorism, the only thing that is going to work is to throw brains at the problem. The morale in the military is at an all-time low. Training because of budgetary constraints is deficient. If we want to solve the security/terrorism problem, it will take more than a "politics-as-usual." We are going to have to rebuild our military.

Individual citizens in the present generation-without-antecedents may be tempted to join a militia group, become a recluse anarchist or join the terrorists to get political power. However, anyone with a sense of history will know that is a bad choice.

The time has come for our nation's leader to do more than to wring his hands and say "I feel your hurt." The time has come to admit that special interest legislation is both corrupting and bankrupting us and leading to massive frustration. After spending over 5 trillion dollars in the last 30 years to finance special interest legislation at the expense of working Americans, and we find our problems much greater than when we started. Is it not time to forget liberal notions that have destroyed justice for all and encouraged some to have what they want without effort, without work, by tapping into the public treasury?

The time is late. From my vantage point, it is a simple dilemma: Either we face these questions head on and do what we need to do to stop our moral drift or we face a continued Decline and Fall of the American Empire.

Send comments to: mmostert@mediafax.com