<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
FYI. <br>
<div><br>
<div>Begin forwarded message:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;">
<span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>From:
</b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;">Caroline Herzenberg <<a href="mailto:carol@herzenberg.net">carol@herzenberg.net</a>><br>
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;">
<span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>Date:
</b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;">September 26, 2012 9:07:00 PM CDT<br>
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;">
<font class="Apple-style-span" color="#000000"><b><br>
</b></font></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;">
<span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>Subject:
</b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;"><b>[WBPF] "Never Have So Few Been Able to Frighten So Many"</b><br>
</span></div>
<br>
<div>Agreed there is more to fear than fear itself, but unfortunately it is<br>
true that we are fearful, and seemingly fearful by design. See below<br>
article by a senior fellow at the Cato Institute accompanied by comments<br>
about it from an acquaintance.<br>
<br>
- Carol<br>
<br>
...............................<br>
<br>
<br>
The author of the article below, John Mueller, is a senior fellow at the<br>
right-wing Cato Institute, and I doubt I would agree with him on much;<br>
but I agree with him that more than 10 years after 9/11, the US remains<br>
in a constant state of fear "even though an American's chance of being<br>
killed by a terrorist is about one in 3.5 million per year."<br>
<br>
As a result, Mueller says, it seems likely that people in the US will<br>
"continue uncritically to support extravagant counterterrorism<br>
expenditures, including incessant security checks, civil-liberties<br>
intrusions, expanded police powers, harassment at airports, and<br>
militarized forays overseas if they can convincingly be associated with<br>
the quest to stamp out terrorism."<br>
<br>
The polling figures Mueller cites are particularly interesting, I think.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Philadelphia Inquirer<br>
<br>
September 9, 2012<br>
<br>
Never Have So Few Been Able to Frighten So Many<br>
<br>
By John Mueller<br>
<br>
[John Mueller is a political scientist at Ohio State University and a<br>
senior fellow at the Cato Institute, and coauthor, with Mark Stewart, of<br>
*Terror, Security, and Money: Balancing the Risks, Benefits, and Costs<br>
of Homeland Security*.]<br>
<br>
As we enter the second year of 9/11's second decade, anxieties about<br>
terrorism in the United States haven't declined -- even though no<br>
Islamist terrorist has been able to detonate even the simplest of bombs<br>
in the United States, even though there has been no sizable attack in<br>
the country, even though Osama bin Laden has been expunged, and even<br>
though an American's chance of being killed by a terrorist is about one<br>
in 3.5 million per year.<br>
<br>
The war on terror, therefore, is likely to be with us for a very long<br>
time. Not only is there as yet no light at the end of the tunnel, but it<br>
might have no end at all.<br>
<br>
Since the public remains terrorized, it seems likely to continue<br>
uncritically to support extravagant counterterrorism expenditures,<br>
including incessant security checks, civil-liberties intrusions,<br>
expanded police powers, harassment at airports, and militarized forays<br>
overseas if they can convincingly be associated with the quest to stamp<br>
out terrorism.<br>
<br>
The war in Iraq and economic woes pushed terrorism down on the list of<br>
immediate concerns, and some of the most intense anxieties did decline<br>
in the few weeks after the 9/11 attacks. However, people clearly<br>
continue to deem it an ominous threat, and the absence of further<br>
substantial decline in subsequent years, and now decades, is striking.<br>
<br>
In November 2001, about 35 percent of the public were very or somewhat<br>
worried that they or a family member would become a victim of terrorism.<br>
A decade later, 34 percent profess the same fear. And 75 percent<br>
consider another major attack in the near future to be very or somewhat<br>
likely, about the same as in early 2002.<br>
<br>
The percentage holding that the terrorists are as capable as ever of<br>
launching another major attack is the same now as it was in 2002. Nor<br>
has there been much change since that time in the number who are willing<br>
to trade civil liberties for security or have confidence in the<br>
government's ability to prevent or to protect them from further<br>
terrorism.<br>
<br>
These results suggest that the impact of 9/11 has been internalized. But<br>
people are not simply giving unthinking, routinized responses -- ones<br>
they deem to be socially required. Over time, the numbers on many<br>
questions have fluctuated in reaction to events such as the capture of<br>
Saddam Hussein and the terrorist bombings in London in 2005. The<br>
percentage who think the United States is winning the war on terrorism<br>
has bounced around quite a bit, but it currently stands at almost<br>
exactly the same level as in October 2001 -- even though people<br>
obviously want to believe we are doing progressively better.<br>
<br>
Nor are poll respondents simply responding to alarmist hype coming out<br>
of Washington.<br>
<br>
There was a great deal of that during the George W. Bush administration<br>
-- particularly around the time of the 2004 election, when Attorney<br>
General John Ashcroft, with the FBI director standing beside him,<br>
proclaimed that al-Qaeda was "almost ready" to attack the country in the<br>
"next few months." Such posturing declined in later years and has been<br>
heard very little under the Obama administration, yet anxieties have not<br>
waned.<br>
<br>
The continued persistence of terrorism anxiety is not easy to explain.<br>
It is possible that the initial trauma of 9/11 was importantly<br>
reinforced by the (unrelated) anthrax attacks that followed shortly<br>
after -- fears about being harmed by terrorists began to decline in the<br>
days after 9/11 and then were pushed to their highest levels ever when<br>
the anthrax story came out. There is also special anxiety in the fact<br>
that the 9/11 terrorists were out specifically to kill civilians and to<br>
do so more or less at random.<br>
<br>
The seemingly constant stream of small-time terrorism cases since 9/11<br>
may have kept the pot boiling even without much lasting media interest.<br>
The stress on what these failed (and mostly boneheaded) plotters hoped<br>
to do, not on what they were likely to be able to do, may also have<br>
contributed. So may the popular, if rather bizarre, extrapolation that,<br>
because the 9/11 terrorists were successful with box-cutters, they might<br>
soon be able to use weapons of mass destruction.<br>
<br>
Anthropologist Scott Atran has observed of 9/11 that "perhaps never in<br>
the history of human conflict have so few people with so few actual<br>
means and capabilities frightened so many." Much of that fright, it<br>
appears, has proven to be perpetual.<br>
<br>
E-mail John Mueller at <a href="mailto:bbbb@osu.edu">bbbb@osu.edu</a>.<br>
<br>
From<br>
<a href="http://articles.philly.com/2012-09-09/news/33714781_1_terrorism-major-attack-poll-respondents">http://articles.philly.com/2012-09-09/news/33714781_1_terrorism-major-attack-poll-respondents</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>