The very intelligent media marketing of the so-called terrorist threat to the government serves as an alibi for the enforcement of the controversial legislation on the retention, and secondly as a pretext to maintain power and its manipulation and control of citizens. The policy has been able to use those terms then, or better put it to abuse, if it appears that certain goals by the people, can not be implemented. Public confidence in politics has reached a low point. This is very apparent in the current demonstrations in Gorleben or Stuttgart, where the protest is to be understood as a kind of valve of the citizens. Citizens bring their politics to express and send a clear message to the government. The credibility is on trial, and that in this aspect lies the rub.

The state relies on the intelligence agencies, who have now not really covered itself with glory in the past. So we set up where the people most vulnerable is on - Anxiety & Panic - This is the focus of citizens to terror and security automatically set. As a side effect by the media presence of the "non-obedience" from the focus of citizens is brought. Thus, given the rulers back your leadership role and can fully succeed with the support of the "manipulated" the people, their interests without a fight.

But the interesting question is and remains: who actually financed terrorism and who is the real beneficiary?

In the past, has a demonstrated very clearly the need for the secret services in international and economic decisions of individual States a more important role than is assumed. The last incident in Windhoek a great demonstration of how involved the services and military companies are, deliberately, and how is the mass of information. Again, the media were used as a political football. . Or do you think that without taking any interest "someone" as a suitcase and placed it targeted at the airport in Winhuk? How should we be naive to believe such a story. On sober reflection, the Afghanistan war is a very clear, it's not about terrorism but about raw materials, power and their own interests, which are enforced brutal, because the country has for the major powers USA and Russia an enormous geopolitical importance.

In Russia - Afghanistan conflict, the U.S. financed from the Taliban fighters and equipped with all the necessary weapons, including the training of the Taliban fighters. After the Russian invasion thus acquired the power of the Taliban in Afghanistan and developed a "life".

We find parallels in the Iraq conflict, only the trained and funded Iraqi president, then helped in the power position. Only those structures and personalities develop, always a dictatorial own lives, and are therefore no longer be controlled or controlled by the former financier. It is paradoxical only support one person, and if the person is no longer willing co-operation, he is declared the enemy. Profit gain only the armaments factories on both sides, but the balance for the people of the first Afghanistan war is frightening:

• 1 million deaths
• about 5.5 million refugees
• more than 1,000 destroyed villages
• intern organizations estimate that up to 60,000 Soviet soldiers died.

Not much different it looks during the second Afghan war, which continues today.

Conclusion

War always creates new war. Hatred breeds hatred, always new. As long as the primacy of profit optimization to the primacy of peaceful cooperation in the future will determine our lives, the word terrorism.

Next article in early December on the subject - Neuschwabenland Part II -
Original Article at Skyline Nachrichten