A Disproportionate Response to the Hyped War on TerrorBy The Localist Sun Tzu correctly noted that no state ever benefited from prolonged warfare. Unfortunately, modern technological states have a military-industrial complex which, like a parasite, does benefit from prolonged warfare at the expense of the finances and the liberties of the actual nation. That is exactly what President General Eisenhower warned us about in 1961. Please listen to his chilling warning. When this organism gains inordinate political influence, the tail can wag the dog. Instead of a nations war machine existing to protect the people and their rights, it can become twisted so that the nation and its people exist only to keep the war machine growing. At that point, instead of protecting the rights and property of the people, the war machine becomes the biggest threat to them. During the Cold War, it was obvious why we needed the War Machine, and world-wide bases, and a global spy network, and investigations here at home too. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the War Machine floundered for a bit, searching for a threat it could hype enough to justify its continued growth. 9/11 changed that. The elites understand how badly they have misruled us. They know how many deceptive stratagems they have employed to short circuit all citizen efforts at true reform. The political class is sucking the nation dry, and sooner or later they realize that the illusion will shatter and the common people will figure it out. The security state they are currently erecting with break-neck speed is not to protect us from Islamic terrorists- its to protect them from the American people once it becomes clear how they have robbed us blind. Consider the facts. How many Islamic terrorists have there been, both actual and would be, on American soil each year since 9/11? The average is a paltry 16 per year. That average includes 2009 where they caught 17 would-bes in a single incident. In the vast majority of these cases, government informants were not just providing information, they were essential to the execution of the act of terrorism. The government asset would, for example, be the source of the weapons to be used in the attack. In many of these cases it is very likely that no terrorist attack would have ever gone down without the involvement of the government asset. IOW, the police state is producing would-be terrorists to provide ongoing justification for its increasingly intrusive war on terror. This is not to say that there are no terrorists out there, or that some precautions are not in order. But lets be rational here. Lets be proportional. For 16 actual and wanna-be terrorists a year, most of whom could not have followed through without assistance from a government asset, it make no sense to re-shape a free society of 310 million people into a police state. For 16 men a year, many mentally ill like one of the two captured in the recent Seattle scare, it makes no sense to allow the government to search without a warrant and without probable cause, all your credit card records, your bank records, your emails, and your phone records. It makes no sense to restrict your travel, set up road blocks, and grope your wives and daughters at airports (and now at other mass transit points). The Feds are watching all of us more closely while at the same time letting hordes of new Muslims into the country. None of that makes any sense. That is, it makes no sense if the real goal is to stop Islamic terrorism. If the real goal is to keep profits flowing to the war/security industry and subjugate the American people to a police state then these actions make perfect sense. I call on my conservative friends to be wise and favor allocating resources to threats in a rational and proportional manner. To me, that means less focus on defeating Islamic Terror and more focus on rolling back the domestic police state. Washington D.C is a more immediate threat to our freedoms and prosperity than Mecca. This article originally appeared at: 