Home | About | Donate

Let’s Not Get It Wrong This Time: The Terrorists Won After 9/11 Because We Chose to Invade Iraq, Shred Our Constitution

Let’s Not Get It Wrong This Time: The Terrorists Won After 9/11 Because We Chose to Invade Iraq, Shred Our Constitution

Bret Weinstein

What is terrorism? Many are convinced that the word is inherently so vague as to be meaningless. I have never understood this. To me the definition seems singular, and obvious, and it would appear that simply understanding it is the key to avoiding terrible missteps in the aftermath of an attack like the one in Paris.

Terrorism is a tactic in which the primary objective is to produce fear, rather than direct harm. Terrorist attacks are, first and foremost, psychological operations designed to alter behavior amongst the terrorized in a way that the actors believe will serve them.


The terrorists won after 9/11 because they were not outed.


“We are not made safe from terrorists by helicopters, or missiles or boots on the ground. Nor is it drones, torture or digital dragnets that protect us. What makes us as individuals safe from a terror attack is the staggering probability that we will be elsewhere when one occurs.”

Mr. Weinstein sets up the proposition of what the relative cost returns are on a terrorist event. He says nothing about the lives taken across the Middle East. The American Exceptionalism meme is shown in what is not said.

The concluding statement (copied above) is mortifying. I expected Mr. Weinstein to explain that what makes any nation safe are policies based on justice, fairness, and respect for other nations. For the kind of money squandered on weapons and the senseless destruction of so much Middle East infrastructure, every family could have been given a home, several year’s supply of food, and excellent health care.

The argument that an American has a low chance of being hit by a terrorist event reinforces the idea of the selfish individualist.

True safety comes from building societies that respect life. And when militarism trumps all, and it’s martial maniacs granted the power to write and enact policy, then decency doesn’t have a chance in hell. The bastards have put journalists, wedding parties, and hospitals on their new target lists. No one can negotiate with that species of state-sponsored terror… by whatever name it’s conveniently called.


It may come as a shock to the author, but a lot of us did not get it wrong after 9/11, nor did we choose to invade anyone at the time, anymore than we have never chosen to invade Libya, Afghanistan, and so many other countries to one degree or another since. The reality is that any response to the Paris attacks will be made, as they were post 9/11, by an opportunistic Washington MIC power structure that regards itself to be beyond the law, aided by a media whose function is to fan the flames of war. That power elite didn’t get it wrong; they got exactly what they wanted and will, yet again. There is no “we” or “us” in the equation.


I like this article because it highlights the asymmetry of the financials: seven million to one dollar spend by the jihadists. And we still haven’t won. Or “they” according to jneastra. But these attacks are used to distract us from the real problems of the Earth and existence. The two Democratic candidates jumped on this out of the gate, only Sanders stuck to the issues central to the election, and continues to.


What a spot-on, great comment. Thank you.

1 Like

I appreciate the call for application of the precautionary principle, but if that remains premised on NOT framing it in the full context of the history of ongoing colonization, ecological degradation and enslavement by what are now transnational corporations and multi billion $ PR campaign solipsisms, all too frequently subsidized by taxpayer monies, these will remain aggressively twisted, veiled and advanced. In short, continuing to generate the conditions the former are so dependent on to stake the hegemonic rationalizations of force and destruction at any cost.

The extractive ‘externalized costs’ portions of the pie charts and spreadsheet components of GDP and other metrics protected by this reveals and documents the parasitic nature of the corporate/privatization/demonization/fear dependent ‘defense system’. In other words, it will be like a band aid on a gaping wound.

Prof. W. says what needs be said and the devil take the ratings and polls!

But then that is the issue - polls and public opinion (or rather public perception). This is an electronic media age and both the Terrorists’ activity and our War on Terror are reflections of the role the electronic media age plays in events.

The terrorists need the media’s response or their actions are utterly ineffectual. The author lays it out plain and it is not a matter of empathy but of the bigger picture.

Our response was also media driven. Politicians present an image and put it into practice. After 9/11 Bush/Cheney wanted to present a major mobilization all out response as if it were another Pearl Harbor … but it wasn’t an attack by another country but by a small group of fanatics (a death cult). Nevertheless, the White House wanted to present a total war position… so they went for Iraq instead of Bin Ladin.

Media driven for both the terrorists and for the USA’s response.

The author illustrates that intrinsic media connection in the age of Terrorists. Had politicians made an attempt to form alliances with anti-terror elements in the Middle Eastern nations and spent this money making the fanatical terrorists seem less justified or insane, if we had show the sane people they were welcome and the terrorists not, we would have never ended up in an endless war that we continually encourage and inspire.

Shock and awe was a media event… we should have sensed something was very wrong right then. It wasn’t even the right country nor targeting the fanatics.

Media driven … the terrorists have the advantage there. We have the weapons to fight nations while they have no need of such weapons.

" The American exceptionalism meme is shown in what is not said."

Exactly my thoughts. BINGO!


True. And when Dim Son said: " you are either with the terrorists or with the US" the liar in chief would have had it correct if Bush had said: " you are either with the terrorists that were complicit in the false flag of 9/11 that murdered 3,000 innocent Americans and were murdered on my watch, or you are a stupid fool.

1 Like

“Assuming the official story is right…”

That’s your problem right there.

1 Like

Thank you.

I’m just curious… seeing you running with the ball I typically put into play (without any attribution to me), if you’ve ever backed me when I brought up–as I often do–the point you now make as if your own? Obviously i think the stance is valid. I just find it very curious when I am attacked for challenging the WE meme, and then some “newcomer” shows up and owns the premise as his own, and suddenly he garners all this support?

As a side note…

Seeing the vacuous, “Try to look profound! Try to look presidential!” look on the face of the tool in the White House, in the photo of Bush II that accompanies the article, just demonstrates that he was a tool. If not for his selection to play that role - selected by family affiliation, and by opportunistic handlers who recognized a useful tool for their purposes - Bush II certainly would not have had any coherent ideas of his own.

You are utterly strange. You just are…lol. You are berating someone who agreed with you?

You need medication or therapy. Both.
Lots of meds.

Handed out by females.

1 Like

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

Any coherent ideas of his own?

I think the closest he got was when he said, and I paraphrase:

Fool me once and it is shame on you; fool me twice and it is also shame on you!

1 Like

Not for lack of trying by the CIA and their reactionary counterparts in Italian intelligence when they instituted Operation Gladio . At least half the acts of terrorism attributed to the Red Brigades (Brigatti Rossi) and the Baader-Meinhof Gang were Operation Gladio false flag operations to discredit the Left and swing election results . Operation Gladio , under the direction of former Mussolini secret police , made a point of targeting crowds of obscure civilians , aiming particularly at women and children , the better to sow fear and revulsion .

1 Like

“Terrorism is a tactic in which the primary objective is to produce fear, rather than direct harm.”

That makes every conservative a terrorist.

“For every $1 of damage they did to us, we did $231 to ourselves. For every American that was killed in the attack, we sacrificed more than two on the battlefield. And that is all before we consider the instability we brought to the Middle East, the harm we did to our own freedoms, and the spectacular cost to our reputation abroad.”

There is that “we” again. Please be more specific.

It has been 16 hours since your post and I wondered if
this was inserted later, after your comment?
“The reaction also caused the United States to cripple its own
Constitution and radicalize the Muslim world with a reign of terror that
has killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghani civilians.”

Otherwise, I’m not sure what to make of this criticism which, being inaccurate, would, to some extent, undermine your valid analysis regarding the lack human compassion and appeals to our better nature. One could only hope that he was aiming to overcome the hard-hearted portions of the public to whom compassion and human decency, justice and common humanity are less effective. One does need to try to reach those people too, I suppose, but catering to their sociopathic tendencies could easily end up reinforcing them.