A Supposition

What if terrorism is really just a function of the Corpocratic gov't that holds power in most modern "democracies"?
In "1984", George Orwell painted a world order that is divided into 3 main powers, Eurasia, Oceania, and North America; at any given time, each nation was at war with one of the others, creating an atmosphere of constant warfare and social mobilization. During the course of events, it is discovered that the warzones were more or less created by the gov't to maintain control over the populace. Sound fantastical? What is the current "War on Terror"? An undefined, potentially endless conflict that has in effect put the USA in a constant state of fear amd readiness.
Dwight Eisenhower, at the end of his term as President gave a farewell speech. In it, he warned the American People that they were on the brink of a major takeover. He warned that the country had turned its back on its agrarian past, and was about to be overrun by a "military machine" that would govern the nation in its own interests. His words, largely unheeded, proved all to true, as the US embarked on many "shadow wars" in the Latin American nations, as well as Asia. During the 1960's, society woke up from its stupor, and massive social upheaval created a very unstable environment for the military machine of the Corpocracy. This loss of control by the state was addressed, and the social movements of the mid sixties lost itself in a haze of drug abuse by the 1970's; the gov't then realized that the people were able to rebel as a result of being too well informed and too educated. This was also addressed. In the 1950's, the average American teen had a vocab of over 25000 words. Today, they have a vocab of 10000. Consumerism, which had become imperiled during the 60's, was pushed by the media (which had been bought and then controled by the state), and people were willing to sacrifice their ideals for the big car, big house, big tv, and other symbols of wealth and success.
David Mitchell explains that for a Corpocracy to work, they need to subvert laws in a cycle as "old as tribalism. In the begining there is ignorance. Ignorance engenders fear. Fear ingenders hatred, and hatred engenders violence. Violence breeds further violence, until the only law is whatever is willed by the most powerful." This self same cycle can be seen all over the globe today, even in my own rant against the Freedom Falcons.
Mitchell goes on to say that an "enemy [is] required by any hierarchical state for social cohesion." This thought mirrors the ideas of Orwell. And so, "terrorism" is born in todays world. Oh, I believe that the rank and file of a terrorist cell truly believe in their cause - they have been taught to hate, and that they act justly, and they believe it (it is easy to brainwash someone who is so impoverished that they have nothing to live for anyway), BUT the upper eschalon of the terrorist organization is really just another extension of the ruling Corpocracy - do you really think that with all their military might that the USA could not find Osama bin Laden if they really chose to? "He is avoiding us by travelling at night on donkey"...right, and night vision equipment and satelite survielance can be foiled by an ass (literally)? He has not been found because it serves US intersts that he remain at large, just as it served the Corporate interest that America suffer the attacks of 9/11. I would not be surprised to find bin Laden i the White House, having brekkers with his pal (and good familial business partner), "W".
As for the Kurdish attacks in Turkey, Turkey had become a very unwilling ally in the war on terror, and refused to help in Iraq or Afganistan (they would not even let the US sue their airfields, like the Saudis). As a result, terrorism is on the rise in Turkey, making them sympathetic to the US cause, as they are both victims of attacks. After all, a terrorist is a terrorist, whatever his creed. Having Turkey become anti-terror, and assault the Kurds, it draws Turkey into the American fold, and smooths over recent divides, serving the Corpocratic agenda.
Crazy? Not as much as it sounds, I am afraid. We are living in a scary time, where oh where have all the good people gone? FDR created the "New Deal", and businesses and the wealth suffered while the working classes prospered. Under Eisenhower, the New Deal continued, and Eisenhower described his rich opposition by saying "Who cares what they think. They are negligible, and stupid". Since the reign of Reagan, though (when Terrorism first became a widespread global issue), the rich have prospered and the working classes suffered - even Clinton operated a gov't that was more conservative in its policy than the gov't of Nixon. The "Military [corporate] Machine" prophesied by Eisenhower is now firmly entrenched. Scary times indeed!