Security That Matters
Bruce Schneier has up another essay well worth reading. It doesn’t contain much that he hasn’t already said, but it does a good job of tying things together. And it makes a point I’m afraid is lost on all the Republicans clutching their pearls over the KSM trial:
The best way to help people feel secure is by acting secure around them. Instead of reacting to terrorism with fear, we — and our leaders — need to react with indomitability.
[ . . . ]
By not overreacting, by not responding to movie-plot threats, and by not becoming defensive, we demonstrate the resilience of our society, in our laws, our culture, our freedoms. There is a difference between indomitability and arrogant ‘bring ‘em on’ rhetoric. There’s a difference between accepting the inherent risk that comes with a free and open society, and hyping the threats…
[ . . . ]
Despite fearful rhetoric to the contrary, terrorism is not a transcendent threat. A terrorist attack cannot possibly destroy a country’s way of life; it’s only our reaction to that attack that can do that kind of damage.
The whole thing is very much worth your time.
CG says:
What we really need to worry about is another Japanese sneak attack because Obama bowed to an elderly gentleman with a title.
I hear they may try to bury a U.S. city with unsold “Hello Kitty” gear.
November 16th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
MB says:
Watch for the folks with full shopping bags running and yelling “Sanrio!”, eh?
November 16th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
LFS says:
Really, the Republicans?
http://wcbstv.com/politics/911.trial.paterson.2.1316155.html
Trying some in US courts and leaving others to the military tribunals looks like a political ploy.
November 16th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
MB says:
There’s no pearl-clutching there (cf. Shaddeg, McConnell, et al.). That isn’t to say that it’s unique to Republicans. The House defunding of the attempted Gitmo closure certainly showed that.
And yes, I agree that some level of politics drove the separation into trials and tribunals. I’d prefer all trials, myself. But if you want to take honest aim at that, then take up the issue with those that authorized the torture in the first place (b/c that’s what I’m fairly sure is being covered up by the tribunals).
November 17th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
LFS says:
BTW, 51% of Americans are clutching their pearls:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/november_2009/51_oppose_decision_to_try_terrorists_in_new_york_city
But you probably hit the nail on the head with the torture thing… that’s what this is all about.
November 17th, 2009 at 2:46 pm