"The question is, how much of this anti-terrorism is needed, and how much of it has become one giant political con game, a cover for covert policies seeking, unspoken, otherwise unacceptable ends? "
BOB BAUMAN, Editor - Sovereign Society.
Someone once said that "like dreams, statistics are a form of wish fulfillment." Often, for those who quote them, that's certainly true. Americans especially, seem to love numbers, often unquestioningly . (Statistics are, in fact, the mathematics of the collection, organization, and interpretation of numerical data).
What got me to thinking about statistics is an article by Charlie Reese, a very conservative gentleman who has been a columnist for 49 years, most recently for the Orlando Sentinel. He suggests that we all take a closer look at terrorism and the war on terror in a coldly realistic and relative sense.
Says he: "What you have to realize is that the few terrorists who actually exist are supporting a large industry in the US. President Bush bases his whole administration on it. There are hundreds of self-proclaimed experts on terrorism. The media are fascinated by it. The bureaucracy has exploded, and every law enforcement agency and fire department in the country is latching on to the gravy train. Private industry is thriving selling gadgets and alleged expertise."
Much like the long lost "war on drugs," the "war on terror" has provided an almost unchecked political license for expansion of government and police powers, seriously diminishing our rights and liberties. In part, that's because the unspoken theory behind these "wars" is that we are all presumed guilty, (ID cards, biometric passports, fingerprinting, wire- tapping, banks as spies, detention without charges or counsel), until we can prove otherwise.
While no one advocates supine acceptance of terrorism, the question needs to be asked -- is government's response not grotesquely out of proportion to the real threat? The US is at war with two nations and eyeing a third, and the US Constitution is bent beyond recognition.
With all due respect to the 55 people killed in London on 7-7 and the 3000 that died on 7-11, in all the wars America has fought, including of our own Civil War, 1,090,200 died. And how many tens of thousands, Americans and Iraqis, have died and are dying every day in Iraq?
So is this US response rationally proportionate to the real risk?
Charlie Reese notes that in 2001, American criminals killed four times as many Americans as did the 9-11 attacks. Terrorists killed 3,000; US homicides totaled 12,000. In the same year 101,000 Americans were killed in accidents; 2 million died of natural causes; flu and pneumonia in 2001 killed 62,000 and more than 15,000 Americans died in falls, most of them in and around the home. Except for the occasional sensational murder, or car wreck, few of these thousands of deaths got much TV or media coverage. They are all tragic in their own way, but perspective is needed.
The Sovereign Society has long suggested alternative places for offshore residency and citizenship. But even in the US, the chances of your being a terror victim are minuscule.
The question is, how much of this anti-terrorism is needed, and how much of it has become one giant political con game, a cover for covert policies seeking, unspoken, otherwise unacceptable ends?
