The masters of terror

Yes, there are evil men in the world. Some of them currently govern us.

Make no mistake about it.

There is evil in the world.

There are men who don’t care how many innocent people they kill in their lust to seize and hold power.

There are men who hate our freedoms, and want to terrify us into surrendering them.

The same men, of course, who are “not that concerned” about capturing Osama bin Laden.

The same men who failed to finish the job in Afghanistan because they wanted the troops for an excellent adventure that would set up a “Mission Accomplished” photo op.

The same men who ignored the experts and failed to plan for the occupation of Iraq.

The same men who failed to secure the weapons stockpiles before the Iraqi insurgents could arm themselves.

The same men who turned the Coalition Provisional Authority into a patronage dump and slush fund for their political friends and corporate sponsors.

The same men who allowed the looting of the Baghdad Museum by one gang of thieves and of the Defense and Intelligence budgets by a more expensively dressed gang of thieves..

The same men who preferred gay-baiting to recruiting Arabic translators.

The same men who neglected the need for the FBI to hire counter-terrorism agents who spoke any of the relevant languages.

The same men who have made the Department of Homeland Security a bad joke.

The masters of terror.

joint-session-bush-cheney.jpg

Fear them. Fight them.

Author: Mark Kleiman

Professor of Public Policy at the NYU Marron Institute for Urban Management and editor of the Journal of Drug Policy Analysis. Teaches about the methods of policy analysis about drug abuse control and crime control policy, working out the implications of two principles: that swift and certain sanctions don't have to be severe to be effective, and that well-designed threats usually don't have to be carried out. Books: Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know (with Jonathan Caulkins and Angela Hawken) When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment (Princeton, 2009; named one of the "books of the year" by The Economist Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic, 1993) Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control (Greenwood, 1989) UCLA Homepage Curriculum Vitae Contact: Markarkleiman-at-gmail.com

13 thoughts on “The masters of terror”

  1. ok. looking again, it is clear that we must elect democrats and bring sanity to our world view. Stop the kill or be killed mentality, get out of Saudi Arabia and let the Muslims sort out their internecine struggles. We'll deal with whoever is left later….or can we solve 3000 years of Semitic strife…??? sure we can….just ask Cheney….

  2. American Election Law should require a tag line after "The Republican National Committee is Responsible for this Advertisign" suggestions include and as such everything you have just heard is a complete lie. Or remember we will stop at nothing, and no gutter is too low for us to go to get elect Republicans.

  3. Brilliant point Robin, just changing a few lines and menitoning a few home truths like the failure to act on the tenet warning, the failure to put in place the 911 recomendations, the jihadist dream come true of Iraq…state of denial, just turning it around on them with the same ad would be the most effective way to show it for what it is…
    Weak pathetic out of date and dismayingly desperate.
    Ill offer my services to anyone who wants to do it.
    http://www.defworld.blogspot.com

  4. hit the nail on the head…did you notice yesterday's spin by both Bush and Rummy, blaming the Iraqis? Unconsciounable.

  5. Well, I suppose it should count as progress that someone on the infantile left is now comfortable using the word "evil" and is ready to fight it. It's a start.

  6. In a paper, "Dialogue-a proposal," widely available on the Internet, David Bohm, Donald Factor, and Peter Garrett suggest evidence of "a deep and pervasive defect in the process of human thought." Perhaps it is this defect that is the essence of human evil.
    I have a strong hunch that this defect is time confusion (as in Erik H. Erikson's epigenetic scheme or Robert Scaer's book, "The Trauma Spectrum.")
    Time confusion facilitates attribution errors in which situational factors are assigned to personal disposition.
    Those who have recently stolen much of the Bill of Rights make this attribution error with profoundly adamant ignorance and horribly intransigent stupidity. But such ignorance nad stupidity are, as I observe, the routine consequences of intensely time-confused learning.
    Perhaps it would be useful to learn to construct mental models of what we experience in which experiences are parsed into entities and constucts. Entities have objective, verifiable aspects in the scientific sense. Constructs are the mental confabulations used to connect constructs together in ways that appear to have possible meaning.
    Some constructs are hurtful, and we pay dearly for them. Alas, the "Stockholm effect" tends to lead us to value and cherish hurtful constructs because they are so very costly.
    Perhapst the cost of hurtful constructs is a clarion call to replace them with constructs that are less hurtful. Perhaps it is time-confused learning which traps us into thinking that the cost of something is a measure of its worth.
    Costly, hurtful constructs can be neurlogically addictive, by setting up displacements that generate neurological circus rhythms. (See Lance Dodes, "The Heart of Addiction.")
    Is not assigning personal responsibility for the atrocities being done by the present US government an attribution error itself? Perhaps the methods of system dynamics would allow us to sort out where there are opportunities for societal change that have reasonably predictable, constructive outcomes, and in which the theories espoused and the theories in use have some semblance of similarity.
    Will not every form of playing the childish game of King of the Mountain lead to only more forms of addictive displacement?
    How do we sort out sincere confabulation from accurate thought?

Comments are closed.