On the instructional segment of the educational children’s show “Sesame Street,” there was a popular song that prompted the viewer to guess which things were alike and which were not like the other. Even at the elementary school level, children were taught the basic concept of identifying objects or events that are the same or similar. Yet it seems that the FBI, under the current Administration has yet to grasp the concept or ability to determine similarities. For example, let us examine two recent news stories:
BAGHDAD - Six bombs exploded in predominantly Shiite sections of the capital Sunday, killing at least 45 people in a renewal of sectarian carnage that set back the U.S. push to pacify Baghdad. … And in the holy Shiite city of Karbala, health officials raised the toll from a bombing Saturday close to one of the sect’s most sacred shrines, saying 47 people were killed and 224 wounded.
And,
BLACKSBURG, Va. - A gunman opened fire in a dorm and classroom at a college in Virginia on Monday, killing at least 30 people in the deadliest campus shooting in U.S. history. The gunman also was killed, and more than a dozen other people were injured. … Police said there had been bomb threats on campus over the past two weeks but that they had not determined a link to the shootings.
According to most observers, these two incidents would be considered similar acts of terrorism. On most standardized intelligence tests, these incidents would be grouped as similar. Yet the FBI has determined, at least so far, that they are NOT the same type of incident. Regarding the Blacksburg, VA incident, the following official report was given:
FBI spokesman Richard Kolko in Washington said there was no immediate evidence to suggest it was a terrorist attack, “but all avenues will be explored.”
The significance of the aptitude for determining similarities is more than academic. President Bush has insisted that we are in a “war on terror” and that many extraordinary measures are needed to fight this war. He has declared that the “enemy” must be fought and defeated, even at the cost of our civil liberties and a substantial drain of economic resources that could be used to improve health care in this nation, as but one alternative priority.
How then, are we to defeat this formidable “enemy” when the official agents and front line organization entrusted with protecting us from this threat seems unable to identify the enemy or an act of terrorism? Why is a bomb threat or a bombing in Iraq an act of terrorism, but not when it occurs on domestic soil at a public university where thousands of American students gather every day? Why does the massacre of dozens of civilians in a public area or shrine in Iraq get labeled as terrorism, but the massacre of dozens of students in a public university in Virginia is not identified as terrorism?
Is it any wonder that the so called “war on terror” is going so poorly when it appears that those responsible for uncovering plots and preventing attacks against Americans do not even know how to identify an incident of terrorism? It is fair to assume that knowing what one is looking for helps the process of discovery. The British Government has abandoned the “war on terror” rhetoric of the Bush Administration. Instead, they are focusing their efforts on substantive investigative and forensic police methods, in cooperation with the law enforcement organizations of other nations, to ferret out plots and conspiracies of criminals to commit acts of violence that threaten the public.
Many experts have argued that the so called “war on terror” rhetoric is primarily a political gambit to inflame or incite the public. They say that to have a true “war” there must be a definable “enemy” that is a nation or nationalist entity. Only then can one determine who we are at war with and whether a war is being won or lost. In contrast, they point to political ploys like the President Johnson “war on poverty.” Poverty is not a cohesive entity or nation with which we could wage war. Since it obviously still exists, as it did prior to that “war,” we must have lost any such war that there might have been. Similarly, there have been egregious and horrible acts of violence and terrorism. One cannot group the methods, the reasons or the assailants into a cohesive entity that can be fought and defeated. This does not diminish the tragedy and horror caused by these senseless act of violence. It does, however, amplify the need to be clear and honest about the nature of the threat and the proper measures used to combat and prevent their occurrence, when possible.
To recognize the obvious similarity of two incidents described above would be child’s play. It takes only simple intelligence that is devoid of delusion or deceitful intent. For the Administration to exploit public fear for political purposes, while failing to uphold one of its primary Constitutional responsibilities of providing for the safety of American citizens is reprehensible. To divert attention and vital resources to a war of choice, when there is no actual threat of immediate danger to America is a travesty. Until the Bush Administration first gains the ability to recognize a terrorist incident when it occurs, and then realizes that its approach and methods are ill suited to preventing terrorist attacks against American citizens, the so called “war on terror” of this Administration will be a very costly failure in both lives and dollars.
No comments:
Post a Comment