James Forsyth probes the psychosis of the 21st century:
To many, wishing 9/11 hadn’t happened extends to a desire to ignore it, dismiss terrorism as a mere nuisance, and argue that the real danger comes from American overreaction rather than from the terrorists themselves. (“9/11 denial,” Foreign Policy blog)
Yeah, that’s it; they’re so shocked by the horror that they want to deny the real danger, which is that the federal government might not be able to find enough petty criminals to charge with terrorism. It’s been five years now, and some idiots are still wetting their pants worrying about the next big attack. Instead of watching TV news and reading books about how Islamic culture is about to grind the US into dust, Forsyth should be paying attention to what the federal government is really doing about terrorism:
WASHINGTON, Sept. 3 — The number of terrorism cases brought by the Justice Department, which surged in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, has dropped sharply since 2002, and prosecutors are turning down hundreds of cases because of weak evidence and other legal problems, according to a study released Sunday. (The New York Times)
This isn’t the first sign that the federal government doesn’t take itself very seriously. They’re worried about a bottle of baby formula blowing up on a plane, but they couldn’t care less about someone hauling a 500-pound nuclear device across the Mexican or Canadian border. They put up “No Parking” signs around federal buildings, but someone with a rocket launcher could blow one up from a hundred yards away. They create the mighty Soviet-sized Homeland Security bureaucracy to protect us, and then let the states spend the money on Neighborhood Watch signs. Homeland Security designates popcorn packaging plants as terrrorist targets, but leaves lax security at nuclear power plants. They want to fight a global, hundred-year War on Terror not with an expanded active-duty, professional military, but with a bunch of recalled reservists and National Guard troops. Give me a break, please.
We’re supposed to be At War, right? Let’s see, we have no oil rationing, no military draft, no police walking around carrying automatic rifles, no enforced curfews, no travel restrictions, no border controls in between checkpoints.
It’s not something I’m denying; it’s just not there. I’m still waiting for my Homeland Security ID card. Still waiting…nope.
But 9/11 changed everything, right? Now we realize that not everyone thinks we’re the bestest and brightest, so we’re supposed to be scared of them, because they hate our freedoms.
I don’t get it: If it’s such a serious security issue, why don’t the G-men just do their jobs? Why is it such a big public relations problem? Why does the War on Terror look so much like … a marketing campaign? There are even a bunch of grassroots viral-marketing shills.
There’s a name for people who fondly remember old marketing gimmicks and get really offended by anyone who desecrates the Great Idols. Dave Campbell calls them fandumentalists:
What it comes down to is I think fandumentalists labor under a lack of recognition of economic reality, an inappropriate sense of ownership, and a weird sense of entitlement. (Dave’s Long Box)
That’s my new psychobabble term to describe people I don’t understand: fandumentalists. People who can’t think for themselves, so they have to fix their attention on some political party, a marketing fad, a sports team, or a traumatic event to give themselves a coherent identity.
These are people who wallow in their victimization complex until they build up just enough righteous anger to sit in their sandbox and shake their fist at the bully across the street. However, they can’t be bothered to get out of the sandbox and see what’s actually going on around them.
Hey … isn’t that really what blogging is all about?