Terror: How does it work?

Terrorism is generally accepted to be the use of criminal or illegal acts in an effort to raise fear.  This raises the question of what is criminal or illegal.  Can a government, acting within it's own laws, raise fear?  Can any group of people, through statements issues from the group, raise fear?  Can these rise to the level of terrorism?  I suggest that the answer to all of these questions is a resounding "Yes" and that terrorist acts are not necessarily criminal or illegal.

So when your government requires more searches, to stop the terrorists, are they not raising the fear level.  Remember the color coded threat levels?  Were those not simple terrorist acts, raising the fear among US citizens so that the erosion of the constitution would go unnoticed or even supported?  As a side note: Why does the US require air passengers to take off their shoes before boarding while most of Europe does not?

When a population changes it's pattern of activity in response to a terrorist threat (For example: if churches became targets of terrorists and the people stopped going to church) does that mean the terrorists have won or lost?  The people will claim they have won because the terrorists are no longer killing them in church.  The terrorists on the other hand will claim victory because people are no longer going to church.  So.... if the act of traveling becomes too arduous because of the security requirements (undressing, 60 minutes lost in the terminal due to lines a security, loss of privacy) and the public stops traveling have the terrorists won?  If the terrorists damage the economy have they won?  Do the terrorists actually have to kill anybody to win?  Don't they only have to threaten?

Have we become so adverse to risk that living life is no longer possible for most people?  Has the US become a nanny state?  If not, then why do we have so much more "security theater" in response to so few deaths?  Have not other countries suffered more prolonged onslaughts with multiple attacks and not been so draconian in their response?

Why has the US been so ready to roll over and be the victim of terrorism?  Why has it lost the battle?  Why have the people not stood up and said "Enough is enough" and refused to accept the government dictates for presumptive security?  Why are we such sheep?

OK, most of you can go back to your first world problems now.

It's Been Awhile ...

.. but some things never change: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/07/nsa-chief-denies-dossiers/

So we are to believe that the NSA, an organization that operates with minimal oversight and tell congress that it can't report the data requested, and is building a 1,000,000 square foot complex in Utah with a 1 Yottabyte capacity is not building dossiers on US citizens?  This is the data center that will store “all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails—parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital ‘pocket litter.’”

Perhaps we should look at the statements through the eyes of a rules lawyer:

Q:  Could the NSA, at the direction of Dick Cheney, identify people who sent e-mails making fun of his inability to hunt in order to waterboard them.?
NSA Guy:  “NSA does not have the ability to do that in the United States.” 

Rules Lawyer: So that is not allowed in the US but if we send the data to Canada or the UK we could legally intercept it there...

Q: “Does the NSA really keep a file on everyone?,”

NSA Gus: "No, we don’t. Absolutely no. And anybody who would tell you that we’re keeping files or dossiers on the American people knows that’s not true.”

Rules Lawyer:  If we don't separate the data into "files" and "folders" (ala the office paradigm) we don't.  I hope nobody asks if we can search our massive database that is not comprised of "files" and "folders" for information about anybody that we have come across in our listening activities.

Or perhaps we should look at the rubber stamping FISA court and see, by their own admission, how many times 4th amendment has been violated:  once.  ONCE?  Just Once?  Is there a conflict of interest here -- me thinks so.

So America, what can you do to put the cat back in the bag?  I fear nothing can be done.  It is time to realize that the US Constitution is just an illusion of protection for the people (and corporations) of the country.  The shadowy specter of the black budget and control of such means that most congress critters have no idea what the secretive security agencies are doing.  Changing your congress critter probably won't change anything -- don't get me started on the myth of choice in a 2-party system.