|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We've been asked to make this book available and we do below. No matter how we slice it, for good or for evil, the book's appearance is a major news event in MIM's and Scotland's history of radicalism. Among other things, the book claims that the SNLA is in possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and allied with the Russian Maoist Party, which David Leslie incorrectly lists as belonging to MIM.(1)
The demand of the SNLA is Scotland for the Scots as opposed to the English. It seems that Gaelic as the language of Scotland may not be very recent, with years such as 1755 being considerations for its last major appearance. On the other hand, the anthrax scare of recent years turns out to have historical roots in English testing on Scottish territory. If there is a contemporary political justification for nationhood, anthrax has to be it.
What we understand is that David Leslie claims to be under threat of death to deal with his SNLA insiders subject fairly. Then of course, any self-respecting journalist wants the ability to keep sources confidential so as to keep the flow of information lively. After all, David Leslie is not paying for the information, nor could he be, so if he expects to have his subject matter published, it is in his interest not to cut interviews on delicate topics concerning all sorts of felonies, conspiracies and insider information, including police insider information. Unlike many books, this one consists of long interview snippets with the SNLA often preceded and followed by Leslie's own investigations and comments.
Leslie's book is some kind of major smoke where there is fire. What kind of fire is it? Who lit it? Even we at MIM do not know. We will offer three theories: 1) the SNLA is a provocation by the British government used to spy on and deceive others including MIM; if so, this book is at the epicenter of the most sensational plot developed over years to entrap MIM, Irish militants and the like; 2) Leslie's book is a provocation issued by third parties benefitting from the British "war on terror"; 3) the third theory would be the grain-of-truth theory that the SNLA actually does represent a new form of struggle tactically located somewhere between conventional "terrorism" and animal rights liberation. One thing we can be sure of--there is smoke being blown in our faces, possibly by more than one side. The first and third theories are the most direct and concern the people involved first-hand; therefore, those two theories have to be given place of prominence.
One thing we can say is that for once major arms contractors are not a major factor in understanding this book. The weapons of the SNLA are all so cheap and home-cooked that arms dealers will be out of the loop. One section of the book cut by our editing also explains that commercial grade explosives and battery triggers are usually a waste of time, so even explosives is something that should be experimented with directly according to the SNLA. While arms dealers do not benefit, we cannot rule out that security guard contractors do benefit from this sort of book claiming that SNLA already has the means to contaminate water supplies and distribute caustic soda poisons through the air.
If MIM were more versed in the political details on the ground in Scotland, we would and should take a more definitive stand on what the truth about this book is. So for the quality of this review on a major news event--we must say "mea culpa" and request an investigation by you our readers. Perhaps you will supply us the missing pieces of what we need to know.
According to this book, some central figures of the Scottish National Liberation Army (SNLA) got their start with the British army. One is a family member of someone with ties to British police at the highest levels. Above all, political competitors of the SNLA's political wing the SSG say that SNLA members must be British undercover agents because of the short prison sentences some have received in connection to activity that has either been overhyped or underhyped depending on one's point of view. Then there is the question of how police agents pop in and out of the book. So there is that buyer-beware side to the book: David Leslie also needs hype to sell a book, so we should not forget that self-interest. He's makes his money in the "true crime" field and happens to have the same name as a Scottish general in history. Many of the tabloid stories about the SNLA are just that--tabloid stories by newspapers who need to sensationalize to sell.
The other side of the story says if there is an Irish Republican Army, why are we so surprised there is an SNLA with connections to Irish militants? And if the struggle is generally bought out in so many places, why are we surprised this would also be so in Scotland? The other side of the story also says that there are many involved with the SNLA over time and some have received heavy sentences in connection to military actions. One lawyer named Willie McRae died in suspicious circumstances being tailed by police. Others have escaped British prosecution mostly because Irish law does not allow extradition for political offenses. If this side of the story is true, the SNLA lacks in fame only because it is too cutting edge, too far ahead of the game for people to believe or process, all the moreso because the British government would rather take it in the chin repeatedly than admit the truth and because the philosophy of the SNLA is to avoid writing in order to focus more on physical resistance and the security of its membership.
MIM can confirm the following points: 1) There is just enough in the British press about the SNLA to make us think where there is smoke, there is fire-- and over a period of years. However, even there, we have to account for government infiltration of the press. 2) We also know that the book's repeated claim that governments often deny militant actions for their own selfish reasons is also true: the British government may not want to "encourage" the SNLA by admitting to the number of attacks mentioned by David Leslie. Even going too gungho in prosecuting SNLA people could end up in a publicity nightmare. The major loser in this scenario is the public which ends up with a false politico- military picture.
Likewise during the Vietnam War, we suspect (and there are books to this effect) that the U.$. government denied many military attacks on itself inside u.$. borders in order not to give the movement for armed struggle a sense of power or victory. For that matter, the Vietnamese being bombed never acknowledged their casualties in public, again to deny the enemy information. The armed struggle of Blacks fanned an intense and historical fear whites have inside u.$. borders, but anti-war bombings in defense of the Vietnamese people received little publicity by comparison; though Nixon in his memoirs admitted to being more concerned with the Weather Underground types than the candle-light marchers. One ironic effect of this dynamic is that public targets such as the World Trade Center become much more attractive to some people frustrated by the corporate media, partly because their destruction cannot be denied. When the first plane hit the tower on 911, the corporate news could cover it as an accident. When the second hit, whether the news media or Bu$h wanted to, it was impossible to avoid that something deliberate had happened and would not be covered up in the media with some weak government story. This is important, because it means that in the interest of their own self-preservation, governments give incentives to their opponents to make spectacular attacks that no one can deny and forget. In turn, this gives governments the excuse to boost their own salaries, hiring and military contractor profits to "fight terrorism."
Another way of looking at the same problem is to look at the number of media stories that depend on their existence strictly from quoting government officials on "foreign policy" and "national security." We know from long experience that the Anglo-Saxon press is too lazy and timid to do any serious reporting without proddings and confirmations from government masters. If the government officials decide to absorb blows without admitting them, few professional journalists would have the backing or means to track down the truth.
If we strip away the hype about "terrorism" by anti-government forces doing a small portion of the violence that Amerikan and British governments do, what remains in this book, our readers may wonder. Is this at long last the true inside story on military attacks by the Scots on British power? On the other hand, if this book is a British government provocation, it is highly detailed and years in the making: in itself a provocation of this sort would be major news involving an attack on MIM, Irish militants and others. Then again, if this book is mostly the truth, the SNLA improvises tactics and strategies to attack the British government that the media dare not report. In that case, David Leslie does his reading public a major favor by explaining how easy it is for so-called terrorists to fight back. The sooner we all understand that and deal with it, the better off everyone is going to be.
There is one point in this book that we agree with the alleged SNLA militant Alec about. Aside from the ease of setting up a "terrorist threat," it is the existing powers-that-be that suffer the most economically from the logic of the "war on terror." Whether they know it or not, these imperialists are damned if they do and damned if they don't. If they agree with MIM and others and attack Patriot Act type furors, they have to increase our credibility while losing a chance to deflect blame on to scapegoats. If they do not attack the Patriot Act, the hype and the wasteful security procedures, their economy goes down the drain, mostly for reasons the imperialists do not understand--not that they would care as they receive bribes from or invest in security contractors or whoever is making profit at the moment.
Somehow the SNLA threatens activity to kill millions and gains publicity as so-called terrorists, but so far no one has died directly at their hands. The concern of David Leslie is that the techniques of the SNLA are in fact so simple that it is a matter of time before SNLA launches a major attack with weapons it already has. If so, it is unwise for the government to go on denying SNLA's threat or the nature of war today in general.
In fact, from MIM's point of view, this book points toward the futility of the current approach to so-called terrorism. The U.$. and British governments repress people around the world and generate "terrorists" (usually contemporary versions of George Washington) who strike back; yet the striking back can be done by just about anyone for any reason. In the face of that, the government goes into denial and hopes to restrict the problem to a select set of people it will attempt to follow, spy on, infiltrate and divide. This is not an adequate approach--anymore than all drug dealers or murderers can be caught by such means. Given the practicality of "terrorism," the only real choice for humyn survival is a serious political movement toward humyn harmony. Whether people know it or not, the economic causes and competitions underneath war and terrorism have to be removed for there to be the least chance of survival. That is the real science we need a grip on--one that provides hope.
Note:
1. MIM does not believe in Comintern style organizations--the idea of
international parties. We just make material in various languages in part for
our own migrants and immigrants in our portion of the world. We also hope to
fire up the brains of people in other countries, but we do not run an international
party. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism-MIM Thought is designed for the minority population
of the world that lives in imperialist countries and their internal semi-colonies.