Today on Blogcritics
Home » Are We As Safe As We Were Or Were We As Safe As We Thought?

Are We As Safe As We Were Or Were We As Safe As We Thought?

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Are we safe? Do you suppose so? Are we safer than we were before? OK, how about before 9/11? Bottom line answer? No, shit no.

Safe is nothing more than perspective. We only thought we were safe because nothing of this magnitude had ever happened before in the U.S. This was an actual attack on our soil.

Things like that just don't happen here, not to us! So I'll personalize a hypothetical situation almost everyone in America can identify with. Work with this — you're alone on an unknown street in a bad-ass neighborhood around 2 AM. Are you safe? Do you feel safe? Highly doubtful. Now you're in that same situation except you have a .45 auto with two extra clips on your belt. Do you feel safe? I'd bet you would, but are you really safe? You really just don't know. It's all just a matter of perspective.

There was an incident in the early 60s involving the Russians, who at the time were our arch-enemies, which brought us literally to the brink of nuclear war. I bring this up as an example of our perception of 'safe'. How safe were we? A lot less safe than we knew, and we were still pretty scared. The government did not let on the absolute seriousness of the situation, but we were still plenty scared. So we were facing a nuclear holocaust, and we didn't even know how close we were. The government fixed everything though, no need to feel frightened, just climb under your desk, just as we practiced. That's right. The government told us that we could survive a nuclear attack if we would just listen to them and climb under our fucking desks. Yup!

So, how safe were we before 9/11? I felt that we were pretty safe, so how come now I feel like there is something the government is not telling us, as was the case in the aforementioned Bay of Pigs incident? I assumed that our Federal Government was serving its most important function, protecting our shores and the people within. I assumed that all flights were being monitored and that there were certain "no-fly" zones which were impenetrable lest an alarm would immediately sound and response would be swift. I assumed that certain areas of the country were probably better protected than others, as they would be primary targets. I assumed that New York City would be high on that list but also that Washington D.C. would be absolutely #1, impossible to penetrate, being the home of all government agencies including the president, vice president, etc. Who would have dreamed that someone could penetrate that space and hit the Pentagon?

That being the case, why even bother with New York? Hell, they could have crashed into the White House, the Capitol, the Pentagon, the Treasury, a veritable smorgasbord of targets which would have brought this country to its knees. How many political leaders, generals, possibly even the president or vice-president could they have taken out? At that moment we would have been open to takeover by Castro (that's meant tongue in cheek for anyone who's about to tell me how absurd that is).

The hijackers could have done a lot more damage had they all flown into D.C. That sort of makes me wonder, really, why not? Why, if they truly wanted to set us in our place because they hate our freedom, did they waste time taking down a couple of buildings when they could have destroyed everything we have that represents our freedom by just focussing the attack on the Capital of our country?

It reminds me of an incident which took place in Boston several years ago. A man shot his wife in the head, then shot himself in the gut and drove around talking to 911 saying he was lost. He claimed some black guys committed the assault. His wife died, he lived, suffering some damage but not near the damage that his wife suffered. Wow, what a great diversion. Almost like sacrificing a piece of the least penetrable building in D.C. while obliterating another target. I mean, if you are going to create such a diversion, why take out the White House or the Capitol building when the Pentagon is built like a literal fortress, able to withstand such a collision with minimal damage, compared to any other building in Washington?

What a sick twist I must be to even think such a thing. I can't help myself, I'm one of those frigging conspiracy nuts everyone always talks about. I don't see it that way. I see a question, I ask it. Always question authority, before you find your authority is the grandson clone of Adolph Hitler. Of course, by even posing these questions, even daring to question the integrity of our so-called leaders, no matter what indications there are that something is very, very wrong, we put ourselves out there as outsiders, lefties, nuts, anything that does not sound popular at the time.  But why is this? What do we owe to these people who end up in office, supposedly serving us, when there are indications that questions are appropriate? Is that not why our Constitution and Bill of Rights are in place? If so, why persecute someone who asks, simply suggests, that something's up in Dodge?
But back to the original subject.

So, do you still have the same answer? Again, how about before 9/11? Most people probably felt safe back then, I suppose, but only because they really didn't give it much thought. Now, since terrorism has come to our shores it's all the government wants to talk about. Now, it seems they're keeping us safe. We even have colors. I'm not sure what we're supposed to do with them; Code red, should we shit red? What the hell kind of elementary school crap is that? Did Bush think of that when he was reading the Little Donkey story? So, how come now that the government claims to be doing the job that they were supposed to be doing pre 9/11, do I feel less safe than ever? I just don't know whom to be afraid of now. Terrorists or our government. Hopefully it's just a bunch of horny, stupid, pimple-face geeks vying for 72 virgins and a bottle of wine. Stupid fucks. We'd all kill ourselves if that were the truth.

If our government was doing only a half of their job, then 9/11 could never have taken place. Not even a single plane should have made it through. According to protocol those planes should have been monitored, contacted, and taken down, which is to say blown out of the sky within minutes. The fact that they weren't even noticed, even up until 20 minutes after the first plane hit the tower can mean one of two things: 1) Our government was criminally negligent in its duties, and there should have been indictments, arrests, and prison sentences galore, possible high level terminations, and even impeachment. Let's face it, this was the biggest screw up in history! There could be no possible excuse or explanation that could satisfy so much as a jury. I still can't believe that everyone has just swallowed this and it's back to business as usual. (I wish I could find a woman that stupid.) or, 2) Our government was involved.

1) Stupid or 2) Involved. I can't think of a third.

That's it! Now I'm a goddam left wing, liberal, Kerry-lovin', tree huggin', faggot piece of shit! Did I cover everything? Actually, I lean a bit toward the right in policy, not that I give two good shits what you may think or if it's even any of your business. Besides, all I want to know is are we safe?

How about this scenario, you're a Pakistani, living in this country. It doesn't matter how long or if you were born here. Do you feel safe since 9/11? Does it seem that people are staring at you all of the time? That they'd love to see you get your ass kicked and your body bloodied?

These are just suppositions, thoughts, ruminations, nothing more, nothing less. These are the things that occur in one's head if one is not fearful of falling outside the norm.
So, whom should we be afraid of now? Hopefully it is just a bunch Muslim freaks.
I almost prefer that answer, otherwise answer #2 looks pretty convincing, and it scares me a hell of a lot more than asshole suicide nuts.

I have no agendas, I have no clue as to who I want our next president to be, as long as he or she's not a Bush or an affiliate (ok, so I have one agenda). At the moment I don't particularly care for anyone. I'm just waiting for someone to come along and make sense. Someone who has no family ties to oil conglomerates, no ties to defense contractors, Bell Helicopters, or any other war machines. Someone who is who he is, not a leftover from the cowboy in the Village People. Not standing on his military record in Vietnam, or who wants to see gays get married or no women to get abortions.

These things don't have a damn thing to do with the presidency. I'm waiting for someone who is more concerned for the average American worker than for spreading our 'democracy' around the world, blowing them up, and paying his friends to rebuild them. Someone who isn't either going to piss off the craziest mother fuckers in the world and then go on vacation, or someone who is going to stop a repeat of 9/11 or worse rather than let it happen because he doesn't know how to do his job and the little devil on his right shoulder says it'll be a great platform, you'll go down in history.

So, are we safe?

Powered by

About Peter

  • Georgio

    Excellent post and hell no we are not safer…Makes you wonder why they did not fly into the White House ..maybe they knew he is never home..

  • Bob Jones

    One reason to attack places like The Twin Towers is (even without goverment and media intervention), it scares the people. People are afraid to go to work.

    If all government buildings were attacked, we would have a big loss – but it wouldn’t scare the people in the same way, they wouldn’t believe it was action against them but more of an overthrow of the the government.

    The simplest answers are usually right, if that is the best evidence of a 9/11 conspiracy – that ‘the terrorists SHOULD/MIGHT/COULD/MAYBE would have done this … ‘ then its clear it probably wasn’t an inside job.

  • Deano

    Actually I believe GWB was reading a book entitled “My Pet Goat”….no little donkeys involved.

  • Dave Nalle

    9/11 pretty much proves that we weren’t safe before that date, we just didn’t know it.

    Which is better to be unsafe and live in blissful ignorance, or to be unsafe and aware of it?

    That said, before and after 9/11 the domestic population of the United States has NOT been in grave danger from terrorism. While we might be subjected to an attack at any time, our population is too large, too populous and too spread out and the logistics of an attack are too challenging for any attack to be carried out which would impose widespread death and destruction.

    Even an attack on the scale of 9/11 which took more than 5 years of planning and preparation is statistically relatively insignificant. If you compare the death figures for 2000, 2001 and 2002 you won’t see a big blip in the death count for the US because of 9/11. The statistical change in your chance of dying was not mathematically significant despite the largest terrorist attack in history.

    The truth is that as individuals we are NEVER completely safe and never have been. There are all sorts of things which could kill us which we routinely don’t worry about. Realistically terrorism should also fall into that category unless we’re planning on vacationing in Beirut.


  • Peter J

    That’s a good point Dave, we were never safe and to be personally fearful of another such attack is ludicrous. We all would have a million to one better chance of being in a serious car wreck than dying in a terror attack.

    That being said, why do we put up with Bush and his ridiculous rantings about those bad ‘folks’ out there and all of his pompous crap. If this matter wasn’t so serious we could do a nightly comedy hour on these freeks that could last indefinitely.

    The point is though, whether it was terrorist “folks” or the government there was criminal negligence and at the very least, as this bumbling idiot himself stated,”the buck stops here”! So let the friggin buck stop and at the very least, impeach the asshole and throw his entire posse of thieves, liars and fools out of office.

    Christ almighty, they impeached Nixon for a deed on the fuckup scale of 1-10 of 2, Bush’s 10 should get him executed.

  • Peter J

    #3 Bob,
    Man, I don’t know about you but I’d have been a lot more unsettled had all of the planes hit D.C.
    That could be a pre-emptive to a lot more attacks on military bases, destroying much of what we have left of a military here. With our nation’s capitol burning it could be a great opportunity for actual terrorists already within to strike targets across the country. Could you imagine that scenario?
    I can and I gotta tell you, that makes me sweat.