The Department of Homeland Security was laid on us as the rational response to Osama bin Laden's declaration of war on America. Kerry had this absolutely right. To fight these transnational thugs we needed a world-wide police effort as well as the armed recovery of Afghanistan.
But these guys either ran around like chickens with their heads cut off or pretended to run around like chickens with their heads cut off, freaking us out, overstating the threat and then whacking our rights so that the Bush Corporate Oligarchy could procede more easily.
When cancer was a big distraction, I do not remember my government putting me on half rations and telling me we will stay the course till a cure is found. We had a war on poverty, yet I was not asked to be a martyr in that battle. There were maybe 10,000 martyrs trying to get America's knee off of their throat. Considering that their two biggest beefs were: 1)We back repressive regimes in the Muslim world. 2)We steal Muslim resources and divide and impoverish Muslim polities. (For instance, bin Laden calls the Western rip-off of oil as the biggest theft ever.)
Now I know we never negotiate with terrorists, (although I suspect that we call terrorists those whom we intend not to negotiate with), but they did have a point, and it definitely was not because our democracy gave them a wedgie. Is it possible that if the TeenyTrees were not so beholden to the Saudis, we might have rather been seen as heroes in the Arab street with different policies? The best plan might have revolved around de-Saudi-ing Arabia, without en-Laden-ing it.