The word "security" is as fraught with anxiety as any in the English language. We apply it to what we most seek to transcend -- like money concerns. As an adjunct to financial security, we prize Internet security to keep identity theft at bay. But, even beyond salting away that cool quarter mil considered the absolute minimum to retire on, what we yearn for most is assurance that we and our loved ones won't meet a violent end.
Like most Americans, our police and armed forces -- command structure aside -- as well as our intelligence agencies, take their jobs seriously. Yet security is not only more elusive than ever for Americans, it's little more than an illusion. As 9/11 made clear, the fatherland, I mean homeland, is more vulnerable to attack than at any time since the War of 1812.
Furthermore, we have a gnawing suspicion that not only are we more likely than ever to be killed, but with a gruesomeness beyond imagining. Of course, like after World War II when the American government made up the Red Menace out whole cloth, this is just where the current administration wants us. As it plays the score from "Psycho" on our heartstrings, we become pushovers for NSA phone-spying and maybe even a strike on Iran.
Not only have Bush & Co. fanned the flames of our fears, they've taken a bellows to those waxing bellicose against us and fired them up as well. Thus have we all become hostage to the administration's deluded conviction that the only way to make those dreams of security come true is by first making our worst fears come true.
To expedite its vision, the administration has made non-state actors (such an innocuous term) like, al Qaeda and lately Hezbollah, and states, like North Korea and Iran, our designated enemies. In addition, it's doing its darndest to re-antagonize China and Russia and restore them to their previous status of Red Menace, or a latter-day version thereof.
Because of its isolated land mass, not to mention friendly neighbors, the US is safe from invasion. But that's backfired on us. If a state can't attack by land, sea, or air, its only recourse is missiles -- and what's a missile without a nuclear warhead?
Meanwhile, until non-state actors like al Qaeda master the magical mubtakkar -- a germ warfare dispersion device described by Ron Suskind in "The One Percent Doctrine" -- the method to their madness is also explosives.
Among the conventional is the technique in which victims are served up a medley of nails, screws, and bolts, which your better suicide bomber drizzles with anticoagulant medication to keep the blood flow refreshed. When not instant, this kind of death can stake a claim on that overused adjective "horrific."
Meanwhile, the anticipation wreaks havoc with our psyches, especially if we use commuter hubs. But death by suicide bombing is almost merciful compared to the second scenario.
Consciously or not, many who fly come to terms with the possibility of a plane crash. After all, those of us who drive have made some kind of peace with the prospect of a fatal car crash. But, when it comes to horrific, death by crushing or exploding doesn't hold a candle to a bomb exploding on a plane.
What could be worse than getting sucked out of a hole a bomb has blown in the side of the plane? Unless it's being blown sky high. To appreciate the horror of surviving the blast, if only for a couple of seconds, think World Trade Center jumpers.
Now, the other explosive -- nuclear. These days, it's not just an attack by a state with which we need to be concerned, but by those pesky non-state actors. They seek -- or, just as likely, have actually bought -- materials directly from a nuclear state like Pakistan or North Korea, or stolen "loose nukes" from the Russian mob.
According to nuclear anti-terrorism expert Graham Allison, nuclear suitcase bomb parts and enriched uranium can be hidden in bales of marijuana, and we all know how easy that it to smuggle. (Hope that uranium doesn't leach into the pot. Otherwise the market for reefer laced with angel dust or crack will go up in smoke.)
If you're just outside the blast range, you may be spared a fate as a charred corpse, but the humiliation you are about to experience will be complete. You'll lose face -- literally: your face will slide off -- in front of your co-workers. If you don't die from your injuries, you'll die of embarrassment.
After all, who wants to melt to death in front of others? Of course, a slow death over the course of a nuclear winter -- like the dinosaurs after a meteor strike blotted out the sun -- is no bargain either.
Our security then is vulnerable to breaching by not only two separate forces, but two types of threats. For that we owe a debt of thanks to Bush & Co., who, as is common knowledge by now, thought 9/11 gave them carte blanche to make the world safe for free markets (free, that is, to run rampant over local economies).
Russ Wellen is the nuclear deproliferation editor for OpEdNews. He's also on the staffs of Freezerbox and Scholars & Rogues.
"It's hard to tell people not to smoke when you have a cigarette dangling from your mouth." -- Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency
I just would like to add to this excellent article...
Any security (from police to National Security) is about 98% a development of the dedicated core of the professionals. Those people are supposed to be scrutinized on the basis of the following:
honesty
integrity
logic
dedication
professionalism
courage
These people are to know exactly what they do , why and what are their obligation towards the country or an office. There must not be ANY OBLIGATION TOWARDS ANY INDIVIDUAL OR A GROUP including but not limited to PRESIDENT. The national security people are to be responsible only to Congress. And that overseeing is to be extremely tight and puinishment for violation - severe.
The national security must not include anything which does not constitute a tool of one, namely assassinations, torture, lying to the people, cooking the books, deliberate undermining of countries, etc. It has to be efficient in using the currently available technology and cultivation of allies.
National security administaration officials from middle managemment and up are to be annually scrutinized by Congress in order to provide absolute transparency about their activities. No ' blue' ' black', 'wetboy' or any other operations are to be performed.
Last but not least. National Security people cannot and should not act as law enforcers or executioners. They cannot command over military personnel and they cannot plan military operations.
Homeland Security as it is now does nothing like that. On the contrary- it serves individuals. We are less safe than before.
by
Mark Sashine (44 articles, 19 quicklinks, 228 diaries, 3265 comments)
on Tuesday, September 12, 2006 at 11:43:11 AM
I am in the process of moving from Ohio to Tennessee. You should see the political ads on their TV. You even have democrats bragging that they voted to spend 5 trillion dollars to defeat terrorism (Bill Ford against Bob Corker Senate race).
The other big issue is who hates Mexicans worse.
by
mattzcat (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 44 comments)
on Sunday, September 24, 2006 at 3:52:40 AM
