Читаем Conservatives Without Conscience полностью

By and large Bush, Cheney, and their White House media operation have churned out fear with very few challenges from the media. Cheney regularly tells Americans that we are “up against an adversary who, with a relatively small number of people, could come together and mount a devastating attack against the United States,” adding, “The ultimate threat now would be a group of al Qaeda in the middle of one of our cities with a nuclear weapon.”[87] Did the interviewer ask how likely that might be? Or what the government was doing to prevent it or to minimize its impact? No such questions were raised. The Bush White House understands that the media will treat their fearmongering as news, because fear sells news; it keeps people reading, watching, and waiting for updates. There is more fear to come, for the Bush White House is relying on it in their campaign for the 2006 midterm congressional elections. This, in turn, will set the stage for the 2008 presidential election, where authoritarians will make certain fear is a prominent part of the platform.

Bush’s top political strategist, Karl Rove, gave the word to the political troops at a meeting of the Republican National Committee in early 2006. “America is at war—and so our national security is at the forefront of the minds of Americans,” Rove said, as he rattled the White House saber. “The United States faces a ruthless enemy—and we need a commander-in-chief and a Congress who understand the nature of the threat and the gravity of this moment. President Bush and the Republican Party do. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for many Democrats.”[88] I have said little about Rove, principally because this is not a book about the Bush White House. But Karl Rove has all the credentials of a right-wing authoritarian, and if he has a conscience, it has hardly been in evidence during the five years in which he has been in the public eye. He is conspicuously submissive to authority, exceedingly aggressive in pursuing and defending the policies and practices he embraces (namely, whatever George W. Bush believes, or that which is politically expedient), and he is highly conventional. As a political strategist, Rove appreciates the value of fear, so it is not surprising that he proclaimed that the 2006 midterm elections would be won or lost based on how frightened Americans are about terrorism.

A writer for Harper’s magazine recently collected facts that illustrate the 9/11 terror attack from a “detached perspective,” leaving out hot hyperbole by making a cold comparison of hard numbers regarding causes of death in the United States:

In 2001, terrorists killed 2,978 people in the United States, including the five killed by anthrax. In that same year, according to the Centers for Disease Control, heart disease killed 700,142 Americans and cancer 553,768; various accidents claimed 101,537 lives, suicide 30,622, and homicide, not including the [terror] attacks, another 17,330. As President Bush pointed out in January [2004], no one has been killed by terrorists on American soil since then. Neither, according to the FBI, was anyone killed here by terrorists in 2000. In 1999, the number was one. In 1998, it was three. In 1997, zero.[*] Even using 2001 as a baseline, the actuarial tables would suggest that our concern about terror mortality ought to be on the order of our concern about fatal workplace injuries (5,431 deaths) or drowning (3,247). To recognize this is not to dishonor the loss to the families of those people killed by terrorists, but neither should their anguish eclipse that of the families of children who died in their infancy that year (27,801). Every death has its horrors.[89]

Перейти на страницу:

Похожие книги

… Para bellum!
… Para bellum!

* Почему первый японский авианосец, потопленный во Вторую мировую войну, был потоплен советскими лётчиками?* Какую территорию хотела захватить у СССР Финляндия в ходе «зимней» войны 1939—1940 гг.?* Почему в 1939 г. Гитлер напал на своего союзника – Польшу?* Почему Гитлер решил воевать с Великобританией не на Британских островах, а в Африке?* Почему в начале войны 20 тыс. советских танков и 20 тыс. самолётов не смогли задержать немецкие войска с их 3,6 тыс. танков и 3,6 тыс. самолётов?* Почему немцы свои пехотные полки вооружали не «современной» артиллерией, а орудиями, сконструированными в Первую мировую войну?* Почему в 1940 г. немцы демоторизовали (убрали автомобили, заменив их лошадьми) все свои пехотные дивизии?* Почему в немецких танковых корпусах той войны танков было меньше, чем в современных стрелковых корпусах России?* Почему немцы вооружали свои танки маломощными пушками?* Почему немцы самоходно-артиллерийских установок строили больше, чем танков?* Почему Вторая мировая война была не войной моторов, а войной огня?* Почему в конце 1942 г. 6-я армия Паулюса, окружённая под Сталинградом не пробовала прорвать кольцо окружения и дала себя добить?* Почему «лучший ас» Второй мировой войны Э. Хартманн практически никогда не атаковал бомбардировщики?* Почему Западный особый военный округ не привёл войска в боевую готовность вопреки приказу генштаба от 18 июня 1941 г.?Ответы на эти и на многие другие вопросы вы найдёте в этой, на сегодня уникальной, книге по истории Второй мировой войны.

Юрий Игнатьевич Мухин , Владимир Иванович Алексеенко , Андрей Петрович Паршев , Георгий Афанасьевич Литвин

Публицистика / История