Think About It

Air Force Major General Speaks on Terrorism

Once in awhile something comes in my e-mail that is profound.   I will warn you; this piece is long, but take a few minutes and read it carefully.  It’s important.

This is a powerful essay on the threat of Islamic terrorism.  Dr.Vernon Chong is, without a doubt,the most articulate and convincing writer I have read regarding the War in Iraq . If you have any doubts, please open your mind to his essay and give it a fair evaluation. It's also eerily applicable to other current issues, such as Iran 's nuclear program, immigration, NAFTA's impact on American jobs, trade deficits, etc. I had no idea who Dr.Chong is, or the source of these thoughts, so when I received them, I almost deleted them, as well-written as they are. But then I did a Google search on the Doctor and found him to be a retired Air Force surgeon and past commander of Wilford Hall Medical Center in San Antonio ."

If you would like to see who this fine man is, go to this Air Force website and look him up: http://www.af.mil/bios/bio.asp?bioID=5000"

Muslim terrorists and the U.S.A.   A different spin on the war in Iraq: This WAR is REAL

Dr.. Vernon Chong, Major General, USAF, Retired

To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII).

The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means.

First, let's examine a few basics:

1 When did the threat to us start? Many will say September 11, 2001.  The answer, as far as the United States is concerned, is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us:

* Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979;
* Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983;
* Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983;
* Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988;
* First New York World Trade Center attack 1993;
* Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996;
* Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998;
* Dares Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998;
* Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000;
* New York World Trade Center 2001;
* Pentagon 2001.

(Note: during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide.)

2 Why were we attacked?

Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks
happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush1, Clinton and Bush 2.  We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats, as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessor, President Ford.

3 Who were the attackers?
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.

4 What is the Muslim population of the World?
25%.

5 Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?
Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the
predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian), that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests). (see http://www.Nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm
Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis as the six million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom hear of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy in killing anyone who got in the way of his extermination of the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian, or any others.
Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way -- their own people or the Spanish, British, French or anyone else. The point here is that, just like the peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing -- by their own pronouncements -- killing all of us "infidels." I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was to remain silent or be killed?

6 So who are we at war with?
There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid
verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal There is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.

So with that background, now to the two major questions:

If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions:

1 Can we lose this war?
We can definitely lose this war and, as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second question - What does losing mean?

It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home, and going on about our business, like post-Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get.

What losing really means is:
We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but, rather, will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us over the past 18 years. The plan was, clearly, for terrorists to attack us until we were neutered and submissive to them.

We would, of course, have no future support from other nations, for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see; we are impotent and cannot help them..

They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq . Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do will be done. Spain is finished.

The next will probably be France . Our one hope with France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished, too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us.  However, it may already be too late for France . France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast.

Without our support, Great Britain will go, also. Recently, I read that
there are more mosques in England than churches.

2 What does losing really mean?

If we lose the war, our production, income, exports, and way of life
will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal
with us if they were threatened by the Muslims? If we can't stop the
Muslim terrorists, how could anyone else?

The radical Muslims fully know what is riding on this war, and therefore are completely committed to winning, at any cost. We'd better know it, too, and be likewise committed to winning at any cost.

Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple.
Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.

So, how can we lose the war?
Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by "imploding." That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose and failing to dig in and lend full support to the war effort.
If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win.

Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation:

President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation.  Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war! For the duration, we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights to which we have become accustomed. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.

And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil
rights during WWII, and immediately restored them after the victory ... and, in fact, added many more since that time.

Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him?
No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our
Political Correctness and all of our civil rights during this conflict
and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of your head.

Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the
Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose. I think some actually do. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening. It concerns our friends and it does great damage to our cause.

Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war, by a small group of our military police.. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, cutting out their tongues, and otherwise murdering their own just for disagreeing with Saddam Hussein.

And, just a few years ago, these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type of enemy fighters who recently were burning Americans and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq . And, still more recently, the same type of enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources internationally of the beheading of American prisoners they held.  Compare this with some of our press and politicians, who for several days have thought and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of
some Muslim prisoners -- not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them.

Can they be for real?

The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the
Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of
comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we are in, and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can.

To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this
prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned-- totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again, I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they are absolutely oblivious to the magnitude of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us for many years.

These people are a serious and dangerous liability to the war effort. We must take note of who they are and get them out of office. Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels. That translates into ALL non-Muslims -- not just in the United States , but throughout the world. We are the last bastion of defense.

We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.' That charge is valid. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so good, powerful, and smart that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that, with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world. We can't! If we don't recognize this, our nation, as we know it, will not survive, and no other free country in the world will survive if we are defeated.

And, finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equal rights for anyone -- let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the world.

This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self- inflicted fall of the Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read.

If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by little, on the established French traditions. The French will be fighting among themselves over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?

Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece. And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power.

Muslims have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who the few will be controlling the masses. What is happening in Iraq is a good example. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct about the "peaceful Muslims?"

I close on a hopeful note by repeating what I said before: If we are
united, there is no way that we can lose. I hope now, after the
election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the
critical situation we are in, and will unite to save our country. It is
your future we are talking about. Do whatever you can to preserve it. I reiterate: our national election is under way.

After reading the above, we all must do this, not only for ourselves,
but for our children, our grandchildren, our country, and our world.
Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal .. and that
includes the Politicians and media of our country and the free world.

Please forward this to any you feel may want, or NEED to read it. Our "leaders" in Congress ought to read it, too. There are those who find fault with our country, but it is obvious to anyone who truly thinks through this, that we must UNITE!

Lastly, I wish to add: at the risk of offending, I sincerely think that
anyone who rejects this as just another political rant, or doubts the
seriousness of this issue,is part of the problem. Let's quit laughing at and forwarding the jokes and cartoons which denigrate and ridicule our leaders in this war against terror. They are trying to protect the interests and well being of the US and it's citizens.
Best we support them.

GOD BLESS AMERICA

Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Africa

Last night,     I watched the movie, Beyond the Gates, a movie about the genocide in Rwanda in 1994.  An estimated 800,000 Tutsis were killed by the ruling Hutus while the West looked on.  All of this happened on the watch of President Bill Clinton.  The UN did send a pitifully small force of 5,000 troops, most of whom did not arrive until the genocide was over.  Even then their mandate was not to fire on the Hutus unless fired upon first.  The frustrated UN soldiers were finally pulled out.

Fast forward 14 years to 2008, an International Criminal Tribunal  has put Callixte Kalimanzira, a former Rwandan cabinet minister on trial for taking part in the 1994 genocide.  The UN set up the  ICTR in the Tanzanian town of Arusha, in 1997, to try the most high-profile genocide cases.  Thirty-three people have been tried so far with 28 people being convicted and five acquitted.

Now, for today’s news: “Darfur School Bombed from the Air.”  The Islamic government of the Sudan has been busy carrying out, for the past 5 years, religious and tribal genocide, which has killed an estimated 300,000 people in Darfur.  There are now as estimated 2 million homeless people, thanks to the Sudanese government.  The UN, who has yet to fully deploy its peacekeeping force of 26,000, said the bombings were "unacceptable acts against civilians".  African Union troops make up about 1/3 of the troops deployed in Darfur.  Like Rwanda, the bulk of the genocide had been carried out before the UN managed to get a few token troops on the ground.  This happened on the watch of President George W. Bush.

The point is this, whether it’s a Democrat in office or a Republican, none in the West or anywhere else for that matter are outraged enough to do more than send token forces to help with humanitarian aid and to set up refugee camps. 

This leaves us with some questions:

Is the U.S. being hypocritical when we are quick to intervene in countries where there are “U.S. Interests,” yet do little when there is an ongoing genocide occurring under our noses?

Should “Peace Keeping” duties be taken away from the U.S. and given to NATO?    Would that change anything?

When our presidential election is held in November, will the new President do anything differently when it comes to Africa?

What should the West do when a “Darfur” or “Rwanda” situation breaks out?

The Reverend Jeremiah Wright on African-American Education

Reverend Jeremiah Wright gave his much anticipated speech to the NAACP last night.   Fox carried it in its entirety, so I thought I would watch it.  I thought Wright, in an effort to calm the political waters, would make a conciliatory speech that would portray him as a thoughtful moderate.  Instead, what I saw was a fiery demagogue masquerading as a pastor.  The most disturbing part of his message had to do with the education of African-American children.  He apparently now has a Ph.D. in Psychology in addition to his theological education, or one might think that from watching his speech.  He went into a lengthy diatribe about how black children in the U.S. and in Africa use their right brains to learn while whites use their left brains.  The Reverend Wright explained this is why white teachers find black children sitting and standing on their desks and not paying attention in class.  This is code for, “It’s the white teacher’s fault; just keep doing what you’re doing.”   

Wright next chastised those who speak out against how young African-Americans speak.   (That would be whites and Bill Cosby.)  The Revered Wright went into a lengthy and faulty comparison of how New Englander’s pronounce their words and how young African-American mispronounce their words.  He forgot to mention that the New England accent is just that, an accent.  Moreover; Wright forgot to mention it is the grammar and syntax of young African-Americans that is being criticized, not just their mispronunciation of words.  In other words, “ebonics is just fine, just keep doing what you’re doing.”

There will undoubtedly be those in the media and elsewhere who will praise Wright’s speech as being one of those great speeches on race in America.  First, much of his speech was spent in justifying the poor performance of African-American children in school.  Not once did he suggest that their parents had any part to play in their children’s education.  Second, Wright engaged in his own subtle racism by mocking whites for not being more understanding of the African-American culture.

The Revered Wright has tapped into that surefire formula for creating a following:  Blame all of the African-American’s problems on the white man, while not taking any responsibility for your own actions.  If anyone criticizes him, they are a racist.   

The questions are:
Will the majority of the African-American population ever see these Revered Wrights in their true light?
How can our educational system be modified to assure that young African-Americans will get a good education?
Will the Obama campaign be able to keep the Revered Wright under wraps until November?

Food Shortages or the Beginning of a World Wide Famine?

Are world wide food shortages imminent?  According to many experts, we are entering an era of world wide food shortages brought about by several factors. 

Food prices rose sharply in 2006-2007, and the outlook for 2008 is much worse.  Raw food prices have risen 22% in the past year, which has translated into an overall 6.5% increase in grocery prices during 2007.
Wheat prices rose 92% last year.  The price of corn is up 44% over what it was 15 months ago.  Rice is up nearly 40%.

Russia and India have begun to embargo food for export.  Imported rice is being rationed by many large retailers in the U.S.   Food riots have occurred in several countries.  Starvation is rampant in parts of Africa.  We have been one of the world’s leading exporters of food, but all of this may change.

So, what’s going on?  It appears to be a number of factors coming together at the same time.  We supply about 55% of the world’s supply of corn, but nearly one-third of our corn crop is going into Ethanol production.   This along with other factors has triggered an increase in corn prices.  The demands of the rising middle-class in China and India have driven food prices to higher levels.  Livestock, fed on grain, is also proportionally higher.  Higher fuel prices is adding to the cost of farming and transporting raw food to processing plants and eventually to the stores. 

Add to this the world population explosion.  The world population has doubled in the last 40 years and it is expected to increase by another three billion by 2040. 

The questions are: 
How severe will the shortages become? 
How much of the increases are being driven by commodity speculators?  Will America become the next “Saudi Arabia” of food?
Will the U.S. embargo food? 
Will our position as a leading exporter of food give us the needed leverage with oil producing countries?
Will the world’s population eventually outpace our capacity to produce food?
Will the U.S. drop its Ethanol program?
Are the oil companies conspiring to kill the bio-fuels program? 

Darfur and the African Problem

Recently, I saw the documentary, The Greatest Silence: Rape in the Congo (2008), which documents the brutal assaults on thousands of women in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.  It’s an eye opening film that all should see, particularly liberals.   Thousands of these women were not only raped by rebel and government troops, but large numbers had their sexual organs mutilated.  Thousands upon thousands will require months if not years of rehabilitation. 

Liberals never point their fingers at themselves when discussing the problems in Africa.  They jumped in with both feet after W.W.II, joining the demands of African nationalists who were demanding their independence.  Liberals demanded boycotts of South Africa and Rhodesian businesses, which brought their economies to a standstill.    Eventually, all of the former African colonies of England, France, Spain, and Belgium gained their independence because of political and economic pressures.  Colonial rule, with all its downsides, maintained law and order on the African continent, but once the colonial powers pulled out most of those countries degenerated into wholesale murder and chaos.  Despite promises made by the new South African government, whites have fled in record numbers because of out of control crime directly primarily at whites.  Former Italian Somaliland became Somali after gaining their independence.  They are now nothing more than a feuding patchwork of Muslim war lords and pirates. 

Among those colonies was the Sudan, a British colony.  Today, there is mass genocide going on in Darfur, a region in the western Sudan.  A new generation of liberals are spearheading humanitarian efforts in that region.  This is to be applauded, but I can’t help but wonder how many of them realize the efforts of their activist predecessors helped sow the seeds of what is happening today in that part of the world.

The questions are:  Will the countries of Africa ever gain stability?  Will Islam continue to gain domination in Africa?  Will the African states ever unite into some kind of United States of Africa?  What is the future of Africa?