The September 11 anniversary has just passed quietly without any international coverage. But it rekindled the memories of 9/11 (2001) when the World Trade Centre in New York was blown up supposedly by the foreign invaders. The ‘clever and resourceful’ Arab invaders hijacked American passenger planes and smashed them against the twin-towers and the Pentagon. Within hours of the attack, President Bush and his neocon cohorts accused Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda for the destruction of twin-towers. No proof for the attack was proffered since words uttered by the president of the superpower were proof enough. But the American credibility suffered immeasurably when no serious inquiry was held into the 9/11 catastrophe. Let’s recall what President Ronald Reagan had said sixteen years before 9/11 occurred. He called al-Qaeda, Laden, and Mujahideens freedom fighters. He even met the reps of Mujahideens in the White House. In a National Security Directive in 1985, he ordered to step up military supplies to Mujahideens who were given a clear objective to throw the Russians out of Afghanistan. In the nineteen eighties, the superpower wanted to eject the Russians out of Afghanistan by using the forces it then called Mujahideens and freedom fighters. As the new century began, the same forces were blamed for attacking the heart of the US – the twin-towers in New York. What surprises everyone is the lack of America’s policy of keeping 9/11 alive in public minds. The American government apprehends that a large number of Americans consider the calamity that created world-wide upheaval a false flag operation. It was an inside job in which no foreign elements were involved. Neither Laden nor the so-called al-Qaeda had the capability to carry out such a complicated operation. Imagine when the hijacked passenger planes changed their assigned routes and headed toward the WTC, no US air force jets took off to intercept them. The American credibility suffered immeasurably when no serious inquiry was held into the 9/11 catastrophe. What Eric Margolis, a renowned defence analyst then wrote in one of his columns is enlightening to know the truth behind the 9/11 debacle. He wrote: “The whole story of 9/11 and Al-Qaeda remains murky and confused. Fully a third of Americans don’t accept the official US government version of 9/11, believing the US government or Israel were somehow involved – without any conclusive evidence but a lot of angry questions. Much of the rest of the world also disbelieves the official 9/11 version. In the Muslim world the percentage of disbelievers rises to over 80 percent.” Margolis in his long journalistic career interviewed many heads of the states and has above board credibility. The United States has a war-based economy. The country must wage wars to sustain its economy and to keep weapon manufacturers’ association satisfied. This organisation plays a major role in electing the congressmen and the senators by contributing huge amounts to finance their election campaigns. The elected congressmen and senators later formulate policies which weak countries to attack. Assuming that Mujahideens and al-Qaeda were involved in the 9/11 attacks, what about Iraq? Why was it attacked, especially when the leading weapon inspector Scot Ritter, who now writes regularly on various web sites, had publicly announced that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction? The Muslim country was also slapped with import restrictions, including medicines for children. As a result, half a million children died due to unavailability of medicines. When US ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright was asked in a TV appearance if the price of sanction in the shape of children’s death was right. She responded: “I think that is a very hard choice, but the price, we think, the price is worth it.” So much for the values of human rights the US propagates. Take the case of Libya that was attacked eight years after the attack on Iraq. The country was in no way involved in international politics or opposed US and UK foreign policies. Understandably, the French intelligence orchestrated the uprising in Libya followed by agents of Britain’s MI6. According to the then Daily Mail, intelligence agencies phoned Libyan generals to defect or face targeted assassinations. Imagine democratic Britain whose 90 percent of MPs voted for invading Libya while 53 percent of its public opposed the intervention. Soon the UN stepped in and approved a no-fly zone over Libya. It meant declaration of war on a sovereign country. Muammar Gaddafi was removed, tortured, sodomised and killed. What a fate of a Muslim ruler! French president Nicholas Sarkozy had then warned: “Every ruler should understand, especially Arab rulers, that the reaction of the international community and Europe from this moment on [following the attack on Libya] will be the same each time.” As a consequence, where does the United States stand in terms of regional politics? The value of its currency is falling and is being replaced by BRICS that other countries want to adopt, primarily to get rid of the yoke of American hegemony. Saudi Arabia had always been under American influence and considered an arch-rival of Iran. Thanks to China’s mediation, both Muslim countries have patched up with each other. And both are doing business with China in Yuan. It’s time for other Muslim countries to look east toward China and Russia. The writer is a Lahore-based columnist and can be reached at pinecity@gmail.com