If you’re really afraid of terrorists why do you keep voting for them?

The Boogeyman has been around for a while. He’s older than Santa Claus and, unlike the Jolly Red Fat Man, he’s kind of a bummer. He’s more infamous than even Big Foot or the Loch Ness. He can be found in every country and culture. He goes by various names and might have a slightly different MO depending on his geographical location, but his motivations are the same. In Spain and Portugal, for instance, they call him Sack Man because he puts naughty children in his sack and then takes them away to his lair where they are eaten alive. Sweet dreams, junior. In the Netherlands they call him Black Pete. He brings presents to good boys and girls and kidnaps the bad ones, who are then either brutally murdered or forced to become the next generation of home invading child abductors. This one carries the distinction of being both terrifying and racially insensitive. There are many variations, but they all seem to involve the gruesome butchery of minors and, usually, cannibalism. The Boogeyman is the most useful sort of monster because he has no specific origin or appearance; he can’t be picked out in a lineup of other mythical beasts. He is simply an embodiment of terror, used by (psychologically abusive) parents to scare their children into compliant behavior. The Boogeyman can be whatever they want him to be.

Now go back and read that again, but change a few words – “parents” to “government,” “children” to “citizens,” “Boogeyman” to “terrorists” – and you’ll begin to see just how prolific this monster really is. I know what you’re thinking: “But terrorists are real! We’re fighting a war against them!” Are we? We’re shooting at people we call “terrorists” in Afghanistan, but then they go to Syria and all of the sudden we hand them a bucket of cash and a bushel of grenades, call them “rebels,” and John McCain flies over to make out with them on camera. We fought them in Iraq, but in Egypt we call them a “democratically elected government.” We call Iran a terrorist nation, but we’re BFFs with the Saudis even though almost all of the hijackers on 9-11 were from that country. A couple of scumbags with bombs fashioned from kitchen appliances have been given the terrorist title for inflicting mass casualties in Boston. Yet a man guns down an entire classroom of 1st graders and we’re told he doesn’t deserve the distinction. Then you throw the word “domestic” in front of “terrorist” and it becomes virtually impossible to discern what exactly a guy has to do to earn or avoid the label. What the hell is a “terrorist,” exactly? You’d think at some point in the last decade or so we might have at least come up with a definition.

The dictionary offers a suggestion. “Terrorism: the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.” So maybe it isn’t the Boogeyman who’s the terrorist – it’s the people who use the fear he evokes to manipulate others into submission that are the real terrorists. It’s the parents who say “do your chores or a horrible beast will eat your heart while you sleep,” and, yes, it’s the politicians who say “give up your liberties or shadowy villains will blow up your neighborhood.” It’s the turncoat tyrants in the House of Representatives who last night voted against an amendment that would have de-funded the NSA’s “data collection” program.

Of course, referring to the warrantless seizure of every American’s phone records every day as mere “data collection” is a bit of an understatement. This is broad totalitarian surveillance straight from George Orwell’s nightmares. It’s not even close to constitutional, which is why the pitiful sycophants in the media who try to justify it can only muster some unconvincing nonsense about how it’s all OK because there’s a secret court that says so. Yes, I’m sure the Founding Fathers would be highly impressed with our government’s plan to make an end run around the 4th Amendment by creating a court whose only job is to tell them everything they’re doing is totally cool.

But of course our politicians — fools though they are — aren’t nearly dumb enough to believe it an efficient, nor legal, strategy to look for a small number of “terrorists” by monitoring every single human being in the United States. 85 year old retirees? 16 year old white girls from North Dakota? Yeah, I’m sure they’ve gleaned a lot of useful information for the “fight against terrorism” by tracking the communications of the dangerous malcontents in these demographics. Our leaders in DC aren’t that stupid, even if some of their constituents are gullible enough to buy it. No, this isn’t a choice between liberty and security, it’s a fight between American freedom and government power. It’s the same thing it always is and always has been since the beginning of human civilization.

Our politicians wish to maintain and grow their power by an means necessary. They would kill for it — and they have — but it’s more effective to convince us to give it to them willingly by sowing the seeds of paranoia and fear in our minds. They use terror to get what they want. They are terrorists. So while you worry about the terrorists sitting in caves in the Middle East, I’m more concerned about the ones you keep voting into office in Washington.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to If you’re really afraid of terrorists why do you keep voting for them?

  1. Boagrius says:

    I keep a loaded 12 gauge and two loaded pistol’s in my house. If the boogieman ever pays me a visit, he/she/it will be leaving my house in a body bag.

  2. Martin says:

    You lost me at the beginning but brought me back around by the end. Another great post!

  3. Cylar says:

    I’m confused. Are you saying the problem of Middle Eastern-based terrorism is grossly overstated, or merely that the United States government draws a distinction without a difference between one group of terrorists “over there” and another? You’re not one of those hardcore isolationist types who think all our problems with international terrorism stem solely from American military involvement overseas, are you? And that the problem would magically go away if we closed all our foreign bases? What an incredibly naive (not to mention) foolish view that would be.

    I think what bothers me the most is not even Ben Franklin’s famous aphorism about liberty and security…but rather than our leaders haven’t even attempted to explain how all the invasive domestic spying is going to enhance *security*, much less enhance liberty. I’m beginning to suspect they don’t care all that much about either one. The previous administration seemed primarily concerned with suspected domestic terror cells who were talking to known terror groups operating in in other countries. Now, we’ve got the NSA and its sister agencies trying to collect data on *everyone.* Seems grossly inefficient as well as illegal.

    I suspect the reason the Sandy Hook shooter wasn’t more commonly referred to as a “terrorist” (while the Tsarnev brothers were) is that it was more difficult to pin the Sandy Hook attack on a particular ideology or motive. It seemed like he, James Holmes, and Jared Loughner were just plain nuts, or at best, motivated by anarchist impulses.

    • ageerdes says:

      Famous quotations from two “hard-core isolationists,” who could see through the ruse of endless foreign wars and military occupations:

      A state of war only serves as an excuse for domestic tyranny.
      Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago (1973)
      http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Solzhenitsyn

      A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.
      James Madison
      http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/James_Madison

      • Cylar says:

        Madison wrote that in a time when it took eight weeks to cross the Atlantic and when the US wasn’t importing half its oil from the Middle East.

        You want us out of foreign entanglements? Then start advocating for domestic oil drilling so we can get off foreign oil – and the need to militarily protect the flow of it from forces who want to get their hands around the US economy’s genitals. Other western countries don’t have big armies stationed overseas because A) they prefer to subsidize their citizens’ shiftlessness instead of defending their interests and B) they know the US will handle it for them. Look no further than that stupid war in Libya we had to go and get in the middle of a couple years back.

        Unlike most conservatives, I don’t pretend that our foreign involvement is about much more than that – thought I do think we actually do war on behalf of the oppressed from time to time, I see nothing wrong with going to war for oil as long as we insist on buying it from unstable regions of the world. (And yes, I know a good chunk of our imports comes from Canada/Mexico…so why are we buying it from MidEast dictators at all?)

        Besides, wasn’t Thomas Jefferson the one who sent the USMC over to the Med to fight the Barbary Pirates because they were preying on our shipping? Yeah, I know, different guy than Madison, but they all worked together didn’t they?

  4. Reid says:

    One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.

    • SSG Casper says:

      The biggest hole in this theory is that “freedom fighters” do NOT purposely target non-combatant men, women and children as terrorists do. Collateral Damage is almost a “given” but when you purposely target non-combatants, then you/them are the coward commonly referred to as a terrorist.

      If they (the terrorists) were an actual uniformed military, they would be charged with genocide and other war crimes.

  5. truthseeker00 says:

    Thank you for saying what few want to say – or hear. The so-called ‘War on Terror’ is the exact same tool that is used by parents seeking to control their wayward children by terrorizing them with some version of the Boogeyman. In my childhood it was ‘the dark monster’; although it was only used jokingly, I believe that it most likely stemmed from the boogeyman imagery in my father’s upbringing.
    That is real terror – when those you trust fill you with fear of the most fantastical death, unless you do whatever they tell you to do. The greatest terror in our world is not the supposed acts of supposed militants who supposedly want to kill us. Americans ought to read up on ‘false flag’ events. What is real is that our government has succeeded in eliminating all of the safeguards of liberty that once existed in America, in the name of ‘security’. That ought to send real shivers up our spines.

  6. Just Bob says:

    Forget just for a moment about all of the overseas Bull. (that is mostly lies). I believe the majority of politicians and most main stream media ARE the largest part of our domestic and false foreign terrorists. They are throwing smoke and mirrors to the average citizen by shifting the focus on us so we are too busy looking at each other with a suspicious eye while They most certainly have a hidden agenda. We are being led around like sheep while they rob us blind in the name of false freedoms which have long since vanished. At the rate things are going we will be in some sort of a second civil war before we know what is going on. Look around people! There is so much hate between races in our own country because of political mainstream media coverage. They pick and focus on exactly what they want us to know while burying the whole truth and nothing but the truth. They are liars and manipulators, turning us on each other like a bad movie from the future. The only thing is, it’s not a movie and you can’t rewind it or rewrite it. But we can edit it. It’s time the media took responsibility for their actions or lack there of. I want real reporting from a new, real media source about the facts and only the facts. No political agenda! If they can’t do that, kick them off the air and hold them accountable in a court of their peers as anyone else would have to. Again, take a good look!We need to focus on what is really happening in our government. Start from the top and work our way down! 1st, If the president can’t do his Job and do it honestly and completely as our nations leader, Oust him! 2nd,Clean the House! Literally! (Get rid of these lazy, self motivated,vampires) that call themselves our reps.(We voted them in ,We can oust them)! 3rd,Refuse funding to all of the so called agencies(we need to maintain freedom as we know it), that cannot show proof positive they are making substantial progress in whatever they are supposed to accomplish.( After all would you get payed on your job if you didn’t produce)? 4th,Stop all of these useless taxes being imposed on small businesses so we can bring our large corporations home, put our people back to work and produce some good old american pride products our country was founded upon. This in turn will bring back a thriving small business community which will put the majority of the lower and middle class citizens back to work! And so on and so on. Our forefathers did it with a lot less to work with, why cant we? 5th, we as Americans need to ban together and regain our sense of pride in which made this Beautiful Country the most sought after place on earth for all cultures to unite and stand strong together as one! I still believe in the American Dream! Again, our forefathers did it with a lot less to work with, why can’t we?

  7. Reply #2 to Cylar:

    This topic is too complex to explain here. But here are some leads for you to investigate on your own since you seem genuinely curious about it.

    The quotations I posted above from Solzhenitsyn and Madison highlight the connection between foreign wars and domestic tyranny (such as a police state). Thus, if Americans are gung-ho for foreign wars, they should not be surprised when the ultimate consequence is a domestic police state set up to be used on them.

    America has been at war for most of the last 50 years, and — what do you know — the world’s most powerful police state is now flexing its muscles. The detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) 2012, which allow for American citizens to be indefinitely detained without trial or charges, even on American soil; the domestic and international spy apparatus revealed by Edward Snowden (and others); and the militarization of the local police are a few examples.

    1. See this brief video of President Eisenhower in 1961 warning about the dangers of the growing military-industrial complex: http://historyinahurry.wordpress.com/2013/05/08/beware-the-war-profiteers/

    2. Paul Craig Roberts (a long-time writer, economist, former political insider, and President Reagan’s assistant secretary of the treasury) summed up the current state of America well in this recent 19-minute interview: http://usawatchdog.com/u-s-a-lawless-state-paul-craig-roberts/

    3. Look up the history of the petrodollar to see why the United States is involved in the Middle East and buys oil from dictators. (The dollar is pegged to oil.)

    4. See also Sibel Edmonds’ http://www.boilingfrogspost.com (several videos & articles there don’t require a subscription), and Prof. Michel Chossudovsky’s http://www.globalresearch.ca.

  8. Rachel says:

    “In the Netherlands they call him Black Pete. He brings presents to good boys and girls and kidnaps the bad ones, who are then either brutally murdered or forced to become the next generation of home invading child abductors. This one carries the distinction of being both terrifying and racially insensitive.”

    I know this is the ‘story’ told about black pete in America, but it’s only partly true. In the Netherlands St.Nicholas (you guys copied him, turned him from a wise saint into a fat and rather silly looking man) is accompanied by Black Pete. They live in Spain but visit the Netherlands every year around the 5th of december. Black Pete brings good children presents, but bad children only a little sack of salt or even worse, if they are really bad he can take them with him and St.Nicholas to Spain for a whole year. The St.Nicholas festivities date back from the Medieaval times. One of the most early stories is how this Saint, who lived in ancient Turkey, liberated young african slaves on the slave market. These slaves were so grateful they decided to stay with him as free servants. (so no longer slaves!!)

    But there is more to it. There is of course also the saint – devil, white – black, Godly man – boogey man going on. It is too simplistic to call this racist. It has actually nothing to do with race. St.Nicholas and Black Pete are arche-types, portraying the good and the bad, punishment and reward.

    And then there is another Black Pete. In the chimneys still had to be swept the nickname used for children who were send down the chimney was Black Pete. Because the servant of St.Nicholas goes down the chimney to see if children are good or bad and to bring them presents he’s also called black Pete.

    The problem is the current St.Nicholas/black Pete is a combination of all these three elements. They are not intended to be racist. St.Nicholas and Black Pete are even celebrated by many black Dutch inhabitans.

    However people who are not familiar with the Dutch customs, who do not understand the background are quite opposed to it. They only see white people dressed up as black people, wearing old fashioned 17th century clothes and acting as the servant of an old white man – and they think: RACISM! What makes it even more difficult is how many modern dutch people don’t even know the exact background of black pete. They just view him as black pete.

    To me as a child black pete was just black pete. I never had any racial thoughts about him at all. He was a magical character like elves, hobbits and wizards. We had children from diferent ethnical backgrounds at my school and we all celebrated St.Nicholas together. There was no problem.

    I understand how from an American point of view it might seem racist. But please, before judging a whole nation, try to understand it first.

Comments are closed.