Congressman Duncan: War on Terror is a Major Profit Center
The above video blogger, jaralero , posted this with video:
May 20th, 2008, U.S. House of Representatives. John Duncan [R-TN] quotes Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security, in saying: "We are spending too much on security and should not let an over-exaggerated threat of terrorism drive us crazy, into bankruptcy."
Congressman Duncan also made a reference to James Madison, who once lamented that endless war would be the end of freedom:
"Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other (enemy)... No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."
James Madison, 4th U.S. President, April 20, 1795
That is what Madison said in 1795, because he had the Bush-alike habit of saying something and then doing something else in power. James Madison waged "Madison's War" against Great Britain in 1812. John Lowell Jr. a.k.a. The Boston Rebel, responded writing a book titled "Perpetual War, Mr. Madison's Policy."
Great, great, great, great granddaughter, Carey Lowell.
Back to Madison. As most of you know, he spent the best part of his life fighting the creation of a Central Bank as an unconstitutional monstrosity, only to do the opposite some years down the road, supporting the second National Bank in 1815, a bigger military, and a high tariff to protect the new factories opened during the war.
Wishy-washy and a big spender who led the way to the Military Industrial Complex, it's no wonder that Madison's "bipolar disorder" turned into schizophrenia in his late years, inking out original passages of his correspondence with Thomas Jefferson, and even imitating Jefferson's handwriting. A neocon before neocons.
Madam Speaker, Ian Lustick, a professor of the University of Pennsylvania and research fellow at the Independent Institute in California, wrote an article in The Hill newspaper a few days ago which made a great deal of sense. He wrote this:
``Nearly 7 years after September 11, 2001, what accounts for the vast discrepancy between the terrorist threat facing America and the scale of our response? Why, absent any evidence of a serious domestic terror threat, is the war on terror so enormous, so all-encompassing, and still expanding? The fundamental answer is that al Qaeda's most important accomplishment was not to hijack our planes but to hijack our political system. For a multitude of politicians, interest groups, professional associations, corporations, media organizations, universities, local and State governments, and Federal agency officials, the war on terror is now a major profit center, a funding bonanza, and a set of slogans and sound bites to be inserted into budget, project, grant, and contract proposals.
``For the country as a whole, however, it has become a maelstrom of waste and worry that distracts us from more serious problems.''
Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security, testified before the Senate a few months ago in a way no other Cabinet member probably ever has. He essentially said we are spending too much on security and should not let an over-exaggerated threat of terrorism ``drive us crazy,'' into bankruptcy, trying to defend against every conceivable threat. He went on to say: ``We do have limits and we do have choices to make. We don't want to break the very systems we're trying to protect. We don't want to destroy our way of life trying to save it. We don't want to undercut our economy trying to protect our economy, and we don't want to destroy our civil liberties and our freedoms in order to make ourselves safer.''
Secretary Chertoff was exactly right. I believe that most Members of Congress will vote for almost anything if the word ``security'' is attached to it so that they will not be blamed if something bad happens later. We should do some things to protect against terrorism, but we should not go overboard if we still believe in things like freedom and liberty.
[ http://www.c-spanarchives.org/congres... ]