Fear Is the Name of the Game
By Jacob G. Hornberger
November 27, 2015 "Information
Clearing House" - "FFF"
- President Obama announced, “We do not succumb to fear.”
What did he mean with his use of the pronoun “we”?
He’s got to be talking about the military and the
CIA — i.e., the national-security establishment — which undoubtedly
will not be afraid to drop more bombs in the Middle East and kill
more people in that part of the world.
He certainly can’t be talking about the American
people. They are among the most frightened people in the world! They
succumbed to fear a long time ago, on a permanent, ongoing basis.
Think back to the 9/11 attacks, when most every
American was terrified that the al-Qaeda terrorists were coming to
get them. That’s how Americans ended up living under a government
with emergency totalitarian powers, including the power of the
Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA to arrest Americans, put them into
military dungeons and concentration camps, secretly spy on them, and
even assassinate them, all without trial by jury or due process of
law.
Fear did that. Americans were so terrified that
Osama bin Laden and his million-man army of Muslim terrorists were
coming to get them that they eagerly traded away their freedom to
live under a regime with totalitarian powers — a regime that
promised to keep them “safe.”
Fourteen years later, has their fear dissipated?
Are you kidding? It’s bigger than ever! “ISIS! ISIS! ISIS! They’re
coming to get us! Renew the PATRIOT Act! Give even more power to the
Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA! Do whatever is necessary to keep us
safe!”
Look at how Americans are reacting to the
possibility that Middle East refugees might be admitted into the
United States. “Oh, my gosh, they’re going to come and get me and
behead me, or make me read the Koran, or force me into a mosque!
Don’t even think of letting those horrible people into my country,”
the fearful beseech the president.
The dark irony of the refugee crisis, of course,
is that it’s the U.S. government that is the major cause of the
chaos, violence, and war that has caused people to flee their
homelands in a desperate attempt to save their lives and the lives
of their spouses and children.
Even more darkly, the Americans who have lived
their lives in fear ever since 9/11 and who now fear the refugees
have been major supporters of the interventionism that has caused
the refugee crisis.
Remember Iraq? When the U.S. government invaded
that country, it was the fearful who blindly supported the
aggression. Neither the Iraqi government nor the Iraqi people ever
attacked the United States. But U.S. officials preyed on the
post-9/11 fear that held so many Americans in its grip. “Oh, my
gosh, Saddam Hussein is coming to get us! WMDs! Mushroom clouds!
Yellowcake uranium! Operation Iraqi freedom! Support the troops! ”
And now we see many of the same fearful ones
railing against letting any of the refugees from Iraq come into the
country because they’re afraid that some of them might be angry over
what the U.S. government did to them, their families, and their
country.
Even more darkly, these same fearful ones are
scared to publicly condemn the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the lies
and deception that went with it. They’re scared the U.S. government
might get angry at them for that, maybe even cut off their Social
Security, Medicare, or education grants.
Young people missed all the fear that took place
in the 1990s. The entire decade was a daily litany against Saddam
Hussein, who was called the “new Hitler.” Just think about how
fearful people are about ISIS today and transfer that to Saddam. Day
after day, Americans were treated to diatribes of fear against
Saddam, just as they are today with ISIS (and, until recently,
al-Qaeda). I recall a conservative friend of mine finally getting so
frustrated and exasperated over “Saddam! Saddam! Saddam” on
television every day that he said to me, “We just need to send the
troops in there and take him out!” Never mind the large number of
innocent people that would have to be killed in the process of
taking him out. That didn’t matter.
Of course, my friend genuinely believed that if
the troops or the CIA were to take out Saddam, he would finally be
fear-free and live a life of inner peace. What a joke that was. I am
sure the guy is more fearful than ever before and is exclaiming,
“Oh, my gosh, ISIS, ISIS, ISIS!”
Consider Syria and the hundreds of thousands of
Syrian refugees. The fearful are certain that if they’re admitted to
the United States, a few of them will be terrorists. But why would
Syrian refugees want to do anything bad to Americans? Well, the
reason is because the U.S. government has been doing some very bad
things to Syrians. It’s been killing them for the past several
years.
Why has the U.S. government been killing Syrians?
Because U.S. officials don’t like Syria’s president and want to
replace him with another dictator. Like Iraq, Syria has never
attacked the United States. The U.S. government is the aggressor
there too. That’s why some Syrians — the ones who have lost
brothers, sisters, parents, relatives, or friends because of U.S.
interventionism — might be angry.
What has been the attitude of the fearful during
the U.S. government’s regime-change operation in Syria? Either
full-throated support or muted support. Remember: this is the
national-security state we’re talking about. It’s the idol of the
fearful. Through all the death and destruction that the U.S.
national security state has wreaked in Syria and the rest of the
Middle East for the past several decades, the fearful have just
loyally and blindly repeated their favorite mantras: “Support the
troops!” and “Thank you for your service.”
Actually, though I should say that U.S. officials
don’t like Syria’s president anymore. The word “anymore”
needs to be added because they used to love him. During the time
they loved him, they struck a secret deal with him to torture a
Canadian citizen on behalf of the U.S. national-security
establishment. For that matter, they also used to love Saddam
Hussein, which is why they furnished him with those infamous WMDs —
so that he could use them to kill Iranians with.
What was the attitude of the fearful during those
sordid love affairs between the U.S. national-security state and
foreign dictators? Blind allegiance, rooted in fear. That’s how they
have been able to excuse or support the U.S. renditions, torture,
and assassinations, actions that are traditionally carried out by
totalitarian dictators.
Of course, the fear goes back further, before
9/11. Don’t forget the Cold War, when Americans were absolutely
terrified that the communists were coming to get them and turn
American Red. That’s what the anti-communist crusade was all about,
when the FBI was spying on innocent Americans — that is, Americans
who were suspected of being communist moles — and when the civil
rights movement was considered a communist front for turning America
Red. Just ask the family of Martin Luther King.
An interesting part of the Cold War was that no
one was afraid of Islam, the Muslims, or the terrorists. The fear of
communists and communism was everything.
When President Truman was considering altering
America’s original governmental system with the adoption of
national-security state — a type of governmental apparatus inherent
to totalitarian regimes — he was told that in order to secure the
support of the American people to this radical and fundamental
change to the U.S. government, he would have to scare the hell out
of them.
Truman succeeded beyond his wildest dreams.
Despite their having the most powerful military and intelligence
force in the history of the world, Americans are among the most
fearful people in the world.
Or should I say that it’s because they
have the most powerful military and intelligence force in history,
Americans are among the most fearful people in the world?
Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and
president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.