The term weapons of mass destruction is evolving, and it's evolving to fit into whatever the agenda of the federal government is. During the Bush administration, weapons of mass destruction was the main talking point for justifying an unAmerican like preemptive strike against Iraq. (Americans don't have a tradition of starting wars.)
Then as time went on, the term was used for rhetoric to discredit the Bush administration by the Democrats, which saw similar intelligence as many of these same Democrats approved of the attack of Iraq. Then for some reason, that I still find uncomfortable, W. turned the weapons of mass destruction debate into a joke.
Since Obama took over, weapons of mass destruction has become a more generic term. In the Bush administration, it was used to describe what the United States military describes NBC weapons--nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. These weapons are designed for megadeaths. In the Obama administration, who doesn't have to face the heat of using the word weapons of mass destruction, we have dumbed down these weapons to include the weapons found at the Hutaree militia compound, a bunch of guys in Michigan who liked to play military on their own private property but committed no crimes against society--even a federal judge asked why they were arrested based on the evidence the feds brought against them in court earlier this year. It's also been applied to a "dummy" bomb found in a van driven to a street corner by Mohamed Osman Mohamud, which the FBI now admits the public was never in any danger.
It appears to me the term weapons of mass destruction is taking on a new meaning in order to create fear across the United States so people further comply with the growing police state delivered by the Department of Homeland Security, the same people who have brought you the TSA, naked body scanners, and the groping of the genitals at the airport.
It's frequently used these days. As a student of rhetoric, I think there is a reason the federal government is labeling incidents with the term "weapons of mass destruction."
Listen, I don't know if this Mohamud "Christmas tree bomber" guy from last night is good or bad. It seems to me the rhetoric coming from federal officials including the FBI is intended to create fear, and with fear comes power. In America, we should be able to enjoy the lighting of a Christmas tree without incident, and yet we have this story of weapons of mass destruction in the middle of Portland, Oregon, with the words "dummy bomb" and "public was never in danger." Will we see the day where you must pass through a naked body scanner to enjoy an event like a Christmas tree lighting? Keep talking weapons of mass destruction and that just might be the case. (Remember, Glenn Beck and Alex Jones as well as this blog before Beck has exposed the mobile version of the backscatter x-ray machines that have been purchased by the federal government.)
Was Mohamud a boogie man? Was he harmless and this story overplayed to raise concerns of terrorism in the United States all to further the police state created by the Department of Homeland Security? Eventually, you have got to start asking yourself these questions before we allow more freedoms to die.
Let's look back to the Fort Hood shootings. The FBI knew Major Nidal Malik Hasan was dangerous, and yet they did little to stop him from attacking innocent people on the Fort Hood Army base. Now we have this 19 year old kid who drove a van with a "dummy" bomb to street corner, and he is being arrested for "weapons of mass destruction," a term mocked by the media and some in government for nearly seven years.
Now they are using that term quite freely to describe any type of weapon. Which means if a car bomb is a weapon of mass destruction, well then George W. Bush wasn't lying to us. Right?
This term has become media candy in the press since Bush's departure. It's designed to create fear in hopes you will accept what the federal government is doing for your security without noticing they are creating a police state. Need proof? Go to your airport and look at the TSA line. See how they are asking for your compliance and conditioning you to go through their checkpoints.
If you don't comply, notice the rhetoric they use to call you out and embarrass you. "Opt out! We've got an opt out!" In hopes eyes will follow you with disgust that you haven't bought into the security system of the federal government.
It really bothers me how words are changing meaning since the war on terror has started. Weapons of mass destruction used to be some nukes, biologicals, and chemical weapons designed for megadeath. Now it's a "dummy" bomb on a street corner, and it's all designed to get you to comply with their intrusive technology and pat downs that are the foundations of the American police state.
