The One Percent Doctrine

[Billo_Really]

The Myth of Terrorism, Part Deux
By Larry C. Johnson Monday 03 July 2006

How afraid should we be? If you listen to the Bush administration, a minority of Supreme Court Justices, and the extreme right wing, the answer is simple: RUN, RUN FOR YOUR LIVES! President Bush and Vice President Cheney have said repeatedly that terrorism is an "unprecedented threat." Because it is unprecedented, we must, therefore, be prepared to do anything. Ron Suskind writes in his latest oeuvre, The One Percent Doctrine, that Vice President Dick Cheney said:

"...if there's a one percent chance that al-Qaeda could get its hands on weapons of mass destruction, "we need to treat it as a certainty. It's not about our analysis, or finding a preponderance of evidence. It's about our response."

The fear of terrorism is understandable, but completely irrational. Let me return for a moment to a much criticized op-ed in the New York Times that I wrote in the summer of 2001. I said:

"Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/070306A.shtml

Is terrorism really our greatest threat? When you look back at all the empires in history, haven't they all self-destructed from within? Can we learn from our (and others) past mistakes? Will history repeat itself once more? Will this country become a third world nation because of corporatism and globalization? Or do we watch so much TV that we are now unable to change the coarse we are now on?

 

[Kandahar]

Terrorism is certainly a threat that needs to be dealt with, and will become an even bigger concern over the next few decades. However, I would agree that the degree of fear and policy-making over it is irrational. We haven't been hit by terrorists since 2001, and before that we hadn't been hit by terrorists since 1995. Of course we should try to prevent it, but it seems a little silly to devote SO many resources to it, when there are other dangers that are much more common.

I disagree with this guy's assertion that most terrorism is not caused by Islamic extremists...then who DOES cause it?

Terrorism isn't America's biggest threat now, but that is likely to change in a few decades. It will become increasingly likely that terrorist groups or individual psychotics will get ahold of weapons of mass destruction, including human-designed superviruses or nanobots.

 

[dragonslayer]

Characteristics of Facism.

http://www.rense.com/general37/fascism.htm

I was surprised when I read this article. It is remarkable, as it give a remarkable description to the last two years of the Clinton administration, and the whole Bush Administration. I admit that I totally dislike Bush and Cheney, and certainly don't trust them. I know that I accuse the Right Wing as being Facists, but this article suprised even me and it is very very accurate.

 

[Goobieman]

. We haven't been hit by terrorists since 2001, and before that we hadn't been hit by terrorists since 1995. Of course we should try to prevent it, but it seems a little silly to devote SO many resources to it, when there are other dangers that are much more common.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "we" and "havent been hit".

And, perhaps., the reason we haven tbeen hit since 2001 is because we -have- dedicated so many resources to it?

 

[Kandahar]

I guess that depends on what you mean by "we" and "havent been hit".

I meant that there hasn't been a terrorist attack on American soil since 2001, and before that, since 1995.

And, perhaps., the reason we haven tbeen hit since 2001 is because we -have- dedicated so many resources to it?

We went six years without a terrorist attack prior to 9/11 without a DHS and without a massive war on terror. More time elapsed between April 19, 1995 and September 11, 2001 than between September 11, 2001 and the present. Terror attacks on American soil just aren't that common.

And again, that's not to say that we shouldn't fight terrorists, just that there are other things that we should probably spend geopolitical capital on too.

 

[Goobieman]

Re: Characteristics of Facism.

http://www.rense.com/general37/fascism.htm
I know that I accuse the Right Wing as being Facists, but this article suprised even me and it is very very accurate.

Yer kidding.
If you REALLY buy this as some sort of 'proof' of the fascism of the Bush administration, you must have absolutely no knowledge of history prior to 2000.

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
This has been going on here since 1775, if not sooner.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights -
Please show the current governments "Disdain" for human rights.
Note that a few examples does not illustrate 'disdain' which implies a deliberate and plenary disaffection.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
Like, oh, "Remember Pearl Harbor"?

4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected.
Puhleeze. Compare the $ we spend on the military v the $ we spend on federal welfare/entitlement. Its not even close.

5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated.
Speaks for itself. Unless you want to argue that we've been "Fascist" since 1791, there's not much here that syupports your argument.

6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Again, speaks for itself. The government doesn't control the media and it certainly doesnt censor the wartime news.

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Defione "obsession" and show how the present concern for national security fits it -- and how said concern is not justified.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion.
The two biggest fascists on history -- Hitler and Mussolini - didnt do this.
I think this was included simply as a stab directly at Bush, for being openly Chriistian, and whoever included it hoped that someone like you would fall for it.

Question:
QE2 is the head of the Church of England, which is ther State Church of the UK. Is the UK a fascist state?

9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
Again: been going on for a long time. We were a fascust state in 1860? 1908? 1944? 1968?

Under Fascism, there's far more to the link between corporations and government than what we have today.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
How, exacly, is "labor power" being suppressed?

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
And thuis applies to today's government, because...?

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws.
A self-defeating tenet, plain on its face.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability.
Been going on since the 1820s.
Andy Jackson was a Fascist?

14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham.
Like, oh, 1960 - where mayor Daley stole the election for JFK by making sure he took IL?
And when Nixon had enough class to not do everything he could to find some court somewhre to give him is way?
And how the GOP didn't describe JFK as an "illegitimate" President?

Oh. You didnt mean THAT election.

If you buy these "14 points", then you have been duped by someone that hoped you weren't smart enough to know better.

AND...
Google Dr Lawrence Britt. The only thing I find on him is that he is a Poli-Sci guy and wrote the 14 points you posted. I question thst he actually exists. Where does/did he teach? What other papers/artivles has he written? His dissertation - Where? When? What?

 

[Billo_Really]

I have to pull up my pant legs everytime I read your posts so that they won't get dirty from all the crap you spew!

Originally posted by Goobieman:
Yer kidding.
If you REALLY buy this as some sort of 'proof' of the fascism of the Bush administration, you must have absolutely no knowledge of history prior to 2000.

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
This has been going on here since 1775, if not sooner.

I actually agree with this crap and do not have a problem with it.

Originally posted by Goobieman:
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights -
Please show the current governments "Disdain" for human rights.
Note that a few examples does not illustrate 'disdain' which implies a deliberate and plenary disaffection.

Redefining terms of the Geneva Conventions indicates wholesale disdain for human rights by an administrative body.

Originally posted by Goobieman:
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
Like, oh, "Remember Pearl Harbor"?

Iraq didn't attack us, we were their Pearl Harbor.

Originally posted by Goobieman:
4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected.
Puhleeze. Compare the $ we spend on the military v the $ we spend on federal welfare/entitlement. Its not even close.

Our defense budget is obscene. We spend more than 44 times the amount on our military than China does (which is 2nd highest in the world). Over 400 billion is just insane.

Originally posted by Goobieman:
5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated.
Speaks for itself. Unless you want to argue that we've been "Fascist" since 1791, there's not much here that syupports your argument.

That doesn't change the fact that it's old white guys that are basically running the show.

Originally posted by Goobieman:
6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Again, speaks for itself. The government doesn't control the media and it certainly doesnt censor the wartime news.

Bullshit! What do you call the shooting of journalists, bombing of media outlets, demands for investigations that threaten 1st Ammendment rights, the "mining" of foreign news outlets,lying to the American people regarding wire-tapping while asking the media to not publish the story and most of all...........FOX, HANNITY, O'REILLY, BELTWAY BOYS, etc!

Originally posted by Goobieman:
7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Defione "obsession" and show how the present concern for national security fits it -- and how said concern is not justified.

A country with barely running water and electricity and no navy was said to be a threat to the most technologically advance military in the world 8000 miles away.

Originally posted by Goobieman:
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion.
The two biggest fascists on history -- Hitler and Mussolini - didnt do this.
I think this was included simply as a stab directly at Bush, for being openly Chriistian, and whoever included it hoped that someone like you would fall for it.

Bush is on record for saying his re-election was because of a higher calling. If you do a little research, that's what Hitler thought too. Christian Americans elected George Bush. Christian Germans elected Adolf Hitler.

Originally posted by Goobieman:
9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
Again: been going on for a long time. We were a fascust state in 1860? 1908? 1944? 1968?

The Supreme Court ruling on eminant domain, relaxing environmental laws so we can drill in Alaska, this list is long.

Originally posted by Goobieman:
10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
How, exacly, is "labor power" being suppressed?

It's no secret Bush is "union busting". So this question is a joke!

Originally posted by Goobieman:
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
And thuis applies to today's government, because...?

Ward Churchill...

Originally posted by Goobieman:
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws.
A self-defeating tenet, plain on its face.

We live in a prison state. 1 out of every 136 people are incarcerated. 70% of them are there for victimless crimes.

Originally posted by Goobieman:
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability.
Been going on since the 1820s.
Andy Jackson was a Fascist?

Goobie, you're doing a heckova job!

Originally posted by Goobieman:
14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham.
Like, oh, 1960 - where mayor Daley stole the election for JFK by making sure he took IL?
And when Nixon had enough class to not do everything he could to find some court somewhre to give him is way?
And how the GOP didn't describe JFK as an "illegitimate" President?

Oh. You didnt mean THAT election.

No, were talking about the over 4000 incidents of fraud and electronic voting machine malfunctions. Were talking about the GOP discounting mail in ballots by black soldiers in Iraq because of fraudelant addresses on their ballots. When they were sent a confirmation letter as to their residential address, they didn't return the letter confirming that they lived their because they were overseas in Iraq and Afganistan.

If you buy these "14 points", then you have been duped by someone that hoped you weren't smart enough to know better.

AND...
Google Dr Lawrence Britt. The only thing I find on him is that he is a Poli-Sci guy and wrote the 14 points you posted. I question thst he actually exists. Where does/did he teach? What other papers/artivles has he written? His dissertation - Where? When? What?

I think it's about time you hit that report button again. I know how easy you get your feathers ruffled.

 

[TheNextEra]

I voted NO. While terrorism IS a threat, it is NOT the GREATEST threat to this nation. Oppresion of rights and corruption has ALWAYS been the key to a nation falling in the past.

I don't know of any nation that has actually fallen to terrorism. I have heard of nations falling due to lack of action and the rise of tyranny, but not from terrorism itself.

 

[Alastor]

I voted, "No, terrorism is not our greatest threat."

However, one of the reasons it gets so much bang for the buck is because it actually works in that it does what it is designed to do; terrorize.

It's effective.

It scares the crap out of people, and as such gets a great deal of attention. It plays well in the human psyche. It's unknown and puzzling, lacks logic or rationality, is mortifying, and people respond to it.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Alastor:
I voted, "No, terrorism is not our greatest threat."

However, one of the reasons it gets so much bang for the buck is because it actually works in that it does what it is designed to do; terrorize.

It's effective.

It scares the crap out of people, and as such gets a great deal of attention. It plays well in the human psyche. It's unknown and puzzling, lacks logic or rationality, is mortifying, and people respond to it.

Knowing this, do you think the government deliberately plays the "fear card" for political gain?

 

[TheNextEra]

Knowing this, do you think the government deliberately plays the "fear card" for political gain?

Of course it does. Does anyone remember the "color" terrorism alert this adminstration did before the 2004 election?

Fear is a powerful political tool and is always played when it can. I'm not saying that this adminstation is the only one to do it as well. Just pointing out facts that playing on fears has always been used as a political tool whether it is foriegn or domestic policy.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by TheNextEra:
I voted NO. While terrorism IS a threat, it is NOT the GREATEST threat to this nation. Oppresion of rights and corruption has ALWAYS been the key to a nation falling in the past.

I don't know of any nation that has actually fallen to terrorism. I have heard of nations falling due to lack of action and the rise of tyranny, but not from terrorism itself.

Well said.........

 

[Navy Pride]

I meant that there hasn't been a terrorist attack on American soil since 2001, and before that, since 1995.



We went six years without a terrorist attack prior to 9/11 without a DHS and without a massive war on terror. More time elapsed between April 19, 1995 and September 11, 2001 than between September 11, 2001 and the present. Terror attacks on American soil just aren't that common.

And again, that's not to say that we shouldn't fight terrorists, just that there are other

Its amazing how you can look at the attack on the USS COLE as not a terrorist attack.........17 good men lost their life aboard that ship which is considered and attack on the United States of America........

You nver cease to amaze me....

 

[Navy Pride]

I voted yes in that our biggest threat is a terrorist organization getting a WMD putting here in a strategic place and killing millions and its scary to see the results of this poll and see you liberals poo pooing terrorism.......

How quickly you have forgotten 9/11/01........

 

[drobforever]

If you are willing to put a value to life then of course terrorism is nothing serious at all. As big as 9/11 is as an event, the loss in value is probably insignificant compares to US's GDP or the wealth of US. The problem is that US is such a civilized country that we want to treat every US citizen as something that worth close to infinite, so even though successful teorrist attacks happen very rarely we still think of that as 'big' since anything times a number close to infinity has to be huge.

 

[Alastor]

Knowing this, do you think the government deliberately plays the "fear card" for political gain?

The "government?"

No.

"Politicians?"

Yes.

 

[Kandahar]

Its amazing how you can look at the attack on the USS COLE as not a terrorist attack.........17 good men lost their life aboard that ship which is considered and attack on the United States of America........

You nver cease to amaze me....

It wasn't on American soil, and I would define terrorism as attacks on civilians. Thus the USS Cole attack doesn't qualify for two reasons. If you count all attacks on the US military abroad as "terrorism", there have been thousands of terrorist attacks on America since 9/11.

 

[Alastor]

I voted yes in that our biggest threat is a terrorist organization getting a WMD putting here in a strategic place and killing millions and its scary to see the results of this poll and see you liberals poo pooing terrorism.......

How quickly you have forgotten 9/11/01........

Maybe it's not that we've forgotten... Maybe it's that we've learned.

 

[TheNextEra]

How quickly you have forgotten 9/11/01........

And how quickly you cry chicken little.

There are other threats out there FAR worse than terrorism. I think erroding our constitution and giving rise to tyranny will cause our nation to fall quicker than terrorism ever will.

As I said, I think terrorism IS a threat, I just don't think it is our BIGGEST threat.

 

[Alastor]

I don't know of any nation that has actually fallen to terrorism. I have heard of nations falling due to lack of action and the rise of tyranny, but not from terrorism itself.

Terror has indeed worked. Many many times. It hasn't just toppled cities, states or nations, but entire empires and cultures.

Yes, it has worked.

 

[TheNextEra]

Terror has indeed worked. Many many times. It hasn't just toppled cities, states or nations, but entire empires and cultures.

Yes, it has worked.

Please enlighten us, what empires and cultures have fallen to TERRORISM as the sole (or majority) reason?

 

[Alastor]

Please enlighten us, what empires and cultures have fallen to TERRORISM as the sole (or majority) reason?

No sweat.

"Intafadah" mean anything to you?

How about our own Revolutionary war?

Freedom Fighters of Iran-Contra fame?

It pushed us out of Iraq. It pushed us out of Vietnam. It pushed the Chinese Empire out of Mongolia, and twice out of Japan.

When the Barbarians shredded Rome, they didn't do it in one collective war, nor did they do it in any type of organized fashion - and they did do it.

However, I will confess that even as I rattle these off, there's an article that is compelling which contradicts my position (at least on some of my examples).

You can read it here. Despite that it pertains to Israel, it does have key insights that are fairly enlightening.

Did Rome crumble because it was battered apart and chaotic within, or was it just that they didn't really feel the emotional purpose to continue on their "Empirical" course through history?

In some cases I think you can make the argument that they simply weren't passionate about what they were doing as the article I linked to suggests. This might explain why sometimes terrorism (or guerilla warfare, depending on which side you're on) works - but the real question is whether or not a better or more peaceful option would have worked as well.

The Native-Americans could have resorted to terrorism. They didn't. Though still not adequately compensated (some would argue), they've got a sympathetic audience and are moving that direction, where-as had they resorted to hostilities they may well have been annihilated altogether.

What about slaves?

What about hispanics in our history when we "annexed" Texas?

Would it have worked? We'll never know. I speculate that in many cases it's a non-factor, but that in some cases it is the most compelling factor for overcoming a more advanced foe.

It does work though - if used in the proper time and place.






To make this even more complex, it depends on the motives of the terrorists. Clearly even Al-Qaida did not expect to topple the United States by blowing up two buildings and a corn field. What was their goal? Did they accomplish it?

I'd say, "Yes."

But that'd be another thread entirely.

 

[Columbusite]

What if I told you that the equivalent number of deaths of 9/11 happens every 26 days in this country and that we could prevent it but choose not to? I'm talking about our car-dependent culture. Because we've chosen sprawl over thoughtful city planning and chosen to drive our cars everywhere instead of demand viable alternatives in mass transit, so many of us are suffering from needless losses of loved ones. Yet it seems to be something that is just accepted, that we all drive cars to get to where we need/want to go and that there is no alternative. So many of those needless deaths and life-lasting injuries could be avoided if we gave the middle finger to the car industries and developers of sprawl by not settling for everyone needing a car to get everywhere, to demand from our Departments of Transportation that they not just throw tons of money into more and more freeways, but make other modes of transportation a good option and to let those newly built homes in sprawling suburbs sit empty.

There's probably nothing we can do to prevent some kind of terrorist attack occuring on our soil at some point, although the chances can be minimized. However, we can greatly minimize the number of deaths caused by our insistence on retaining the "car culture of death™".

Here's the comparison of deaths from car accidents to the number of those who died in 9/11:
"In 2001, as many people died every 26 days on American roads as died in the terrorist attacks of 9/11," http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/11/30/051130231753.72wocvgo.html
According to this we are 390 times more likely to die in a car accident than a terrorist attack.

If we go with the numbers provided for the 9/11 death toll in this CNN article
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/10/29/wtc.deaths/ we then have 2,752 deaths. 365 days divided by 26 approiximately equals 14. Take 14 x 2,752 and you get 38,528 deaths every year (in the five years since 2001 projecting the same number for each year we then have almost 200,000 people dead as a result, more than the total population of the city of Dayton, which was 166,179 in 2000). So many of which could be avoided if we would take a stand and value those victims' lives more than a house in a sprawling suburb with a yard, white picket fence, and a car for each husband, wife, and 2.5 kids.

 

[Sir_Alec]

Lack of human rights is America's and the world's biggest threat. So far America is leading as a very bad example of the best there is in the world. Were not a great nation. We're just the best there is, behind Sweden ofcourse

 

[Kandahar]

Terror has indeed worked. Many many times. It hasn't just toppled cities, states or nations, but entire empires and cultures.

Yes, it has worked.

Not true. Terrorists might succeed in instilling terror, but they rarely accomplish their goals.