Many scholars have argued that the events of September 11, 2001 marked a new era in world history. After 9/11, the United States drastically intensified its foreign policy towards the Middle East. Its involvement in the region is largely influenced by Israel and the Jewish lobby within the US, and due to sustaining its oil interests. The events of September 11 not only allowed the United States to target a new enemy, terrorists, but it also allowed Israel to classify Palestinian freedom fighters as terrorists. The new enemy, terrorism, legitimized the Israeli government’s war on the Palestinian population and the United States government “Global War on Terror.” As a result of 9/11, national security became a priority for the American government and was also a reason for the United States to promote a stronger grip in the Middle East.
On June 27, 2012, the International Movement for a Just World (JUST) hosted Professor David Griffin, a philosophy and a theology professor at Claremont University, to give a lecture about September 11 and its relation to the ecological crisis. Griffin first discussed the graveness of the transnational problems of carbon emissions and ocean acidification. He stated that, “the failure of politicians to deal with this is one of the greatest political failures.” He was very critical of the role that the United States plays in dealing with environmental damages. While the US is a global leader, it is also the chief polluter along with other countries such as China and Brazil. Though there are other global problems such as the build-up of nuclear weapons, Griffin states that the ecological threat is more dangerous because with a nuclear war, someone would have to trigger it, whereas the ecological crisis is a gradual process and a deteriorating problem. If business continues in an uncontrollable way and does not take into consideration environmental damage, “civilization will be threatened.” According to Griffin, the political response has been negligent: no steps have been taken in order to stabilize the problem and measures have not been taken to reduce the parts per million figures. Moreover, an effective instrument to control man-made crises such as environmental degradation does not exist. Corporations are concerned with profits and political leaders are subservient to their activities because it is in their interests. He states that one of the main reasons for not controlling businesses is because this would hurt the potential of the US economy.
In the second part of Griffin’s lecture, he questions the validity of the United States’ government claim of who was responsible for 9/11. He believes that after the Cold War ended, a new enemy had to replace the Soviet Union, thus terrorism became the new intimidation. This however, is rhetoric in order to maintain military build-up and spending. Griffin provides a chain of facts and evidence that questions the official report produced by the US government of September 11. For example, after the plane crashed into the twin towers, palladium molten was found as part of the residue, but how was an office fire strong enough to melt a metal that needs a higher temperature to melt? He also criticized President Bush for not acting faster when he had heard about the attack. Another piece of evidence that does not fit the official version was the attack on the Pentagon. Griffin states that the Consensus 9/11 Panel, a panel that opposes the narrative of 9/11, has concluded that it is impossible for a Boeing 757 to hit the Pentagon as it did. Griffin concludes that the evidence does not match the story published by the government and leans towards the idea that the US itself could have been involved in the attacks.
The paranoia of terrorism is a way for the US government to direct the public’s attention to trivial issues. Instead of dealing with serious problems such as the ecological crisis, the US government and media ignore the problem and promote the fight against terrorism. Griffin concludes that countries should not and cannot depend on the United States to combat environmental damage because as a global leader, it has neglected one of today’s most important issues. He suggests that other countries form a coalition against the United States to combat and stabilize environmental damage. Because its tribunal denounced the American leaders of the Bush administration as war criminals, Malaysia is an ideal nation in this region to lead the way for a united coalition.
The audience asked many questions regarding this last statement. One of the participants asked how Malaysia could become a leader when under Prime Minister Mahathir the government was involved in a few ecological-damaging projects. Another question was how important is Malaysia to lead a coalition against the United States. Other comments included America’s negligence of national security in the twin towers areas on September 11. The audience was very interested and responded well to Griffin’s lecture.
The conclusion of the lecture is that elites ignore global challenges because they serve their own interests rather than national interests. They have not yet come to terms with the ecological crisis and create deceptive scenarios to divert the public’s attention. Lastly, in order to be aware of the unobvious, one must be critical of the media and see more than one side of the story.
By: Nama Al-Aboodi