- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
The "big lie" on which much national (let's get rid of the word "homeland" asap) security policy rests even today is that somehow the September 11 attacks were inevitable because measures in place were not adequate to the task of preventing it. By perpetrating this lie (without much challenge from the myopic political opposition), the Bush Administration has incredibly avoided responsibility (and, yes, blame) for the attacks while even more incredibly taking credit for there having been no subsequent attacks. By perpetrating this lie, much of the public has been convinced that it is necessary to their own security that they yield fundamental Constitutional rights (their own and that of others). By perpetrating this lie, a security apparatus worthy only of totalitarian states has been erected which threatens to topple entirely the Constitutional order and rule of law on which this fragile experiment in self government rests. By perpetrating this lie, the Obama Administration is being pressured to continue much of this shameful legacy lest it be accused of sacrificing national security should another attack take place.
Clearly, the first thing that must be done in the new administration is to reject the "big lie" and substitute it with the truth. The truth is that the national security safeguards in effect prior to the September 11 attacks were adequate to the task. It was the lazy, slipshod, inattentive implementation of them by principals in the Bush Administration starting with the President himself that allowed those attacks to be completed. Once that fact is publicly acknowledged, the remainder of the sorry Bush legacy on national security can be jettisoned--and, not to put too fine a point on it, our Constitution and the rule of law restored.
