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

Terrorism - Will Americans Remember in November?

Over the course of the next few months we are going to hear a lot about pulling our troops out of the Middle-East.  I fear that many Americans will be lulled into the trap of thinking, “If we leave them (the Muslims) alone, they will leave us alone.” 

Obama and the Democrats have already laid the groundwork for blaming George W. Bush for any future attacks on the U.S.   The blame game goes like this:  When the U.S. launched an unprovoked attack on Iraq, this triggered jihad against the United States.  Any future attacks is just part of that continuing jihad.  I think it is critical for the McCain campaign to continually remind Americans that we has been under attack since 1968.

1. In 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by a Muslim male, who thought he was striking a blow for the Palestinians.

2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, Israeli athletes were kidnapped and massacred by Muslim males.

3. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by Muslim males.

4. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by Muslim males.

5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by Muslim males.

6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year-old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by Muslim males.

7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens , and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by Muslim males.

8. In 1988 , Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by Muslim males.

9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by Muslim males.

10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim males.

11. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take down the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers.  Thousands of people were killed by Muslim males.

12. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.

13. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by-- you guessed it-- Muslim males.

In addition to reminding our fellow Americans about these attacks, it is important to remind them there have been no attacks against us since 9/ll.

Questions:

How should the McCain campaign handle this information?

Should it be made part of the official campaign?  If McCain does and there is another terrorist attack in the U.S., what effect would that have?

Will Americans remember this when they go to the polls in November?

The Origin of Radical Islam

When we in the West look at Islam, we find it difficult to understand what it is in the Quran or Koran that gives terrorists justification to attack non-Muslims.  The Skeptics Society has published on their website portions of the Quran that is divided into topics.  I encourage all who read this blog to go to the Skeptic Society’s website and review what the Quran has to say about the non-believers.  That would be you, if you aren’t a Muslim.  Below is some of their justification, along with the chapter and verse of the Quran.

The curse of Allah is on disbelievers.--2:89

For disbelievers is a painful doom.--2:104

Those who disbelieve ... will be fuel for Fire.--3:10

Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers--3:28

Choose not friends from them [unbelievers]. ... Take them and kill them wherever ye find them.--4:89

Take them [unbelivers] and kill them wherever ye find them. Against such We have given you clear warrant.--4:91

The disbelievers are an open enemy to you.--4:101

We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve--3:151

Whoso is wont to think (through envy) that Allah will not give him (Muhammad) victory in the world and the Hereafter ... let him stretch a rope up to the roof (of his dwelling), and let him hang himself.--22:15

Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the Fire. As often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment.--4:18

Slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out ... If they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.--2:191

The Children of Israel ... We have cursed them and made hard their hearts--5:12-13

Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. ... He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them.--5:51

The Jews ... We have cast among them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection.--5:64

Fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah.--8:39

Slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush.--9:5

The Jews ... and the Christians ... Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!--9:30

For those who disbelieve, theirs will be a boiling drink and painful doom because they disbelieved.--10:4

We have prepared for disbelievers Fire. Its tent encloseth them. If they ask for showers, they will be showered with water like to molten lead which burneth the faces.--18:29

But as for those who disbelieve, garments of fire will be cut out for them; boiling fluid will be poured down on their heads, Whereby that which is in their bellies, and their skins too, will be melted; And for them are hooked rods of iron.--22:19-21

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world.  The Skeptic Website is:  http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.htm

Questions:

If this is being taught and accepted throughout the world, what will be the result?

There are “secular” Muslims, such as those in Turkey.  Will the fanatics prevail?

What do we in the West do to stem the tide of Islamic fanatics?

Is War with Iran Inevitable?

Reuters is reporting that a spokesman for the Iranian government flatly stated in a press conference yesterday that Iran will not give up its right to enrich uranium.  Meanwhile, a committee representing the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China are putting together an “upgraded package of incentives”  (which is a nice name for a bribe) to try to coax Iran into halting its program to enrich uranium.  Iran has rejected previous “incentive packages.” 

Iran claims it wants to develop nuclear energy to generate electricity, but this statement is suspect when one considers Iran is the fourth largest producer of oil in the world.  Three things are clear: 1) Iran is going to proceed with its development of nuclear energy; 2) Iran will develop nuclear bombs and warheads; 3) Iran has pledged to destroy Israel.

Questions:

Will the U.N. sanctions have any effect?

Will the West allow Iran to develop nuclear bombs?

What kind of action will be taken, if any?

After all the criticism the U.S. has taken over going to war with Iraq, can we take unilateral action against Iran?

Will Israel take unilateral action?

When will this action be taken?

If Iran’s nuclear site is destroyed, how can we be sure it’s their only site?

Free Speech in Academia - How Much?

In the world of academia, we are seeing fewer and fewer professors who support our traditional values.  My personal belief is this sprang out of the turbulent ‘60s and ‘70s when the so called Hippie generation was looking for ways to exert their Marxist beliefs.  I believe they saw teaching and journalism as the two avenues to promote their beliefs onto the American public.

I digress.  Recently, Michigan professor I.S. Wichman, a professor of Mechanical Engineering at Michigan State University, decided to take on a group of Muslim students who were protesting the cartoons that portrayed the Prophet Muhammad as a terrorist.  The students had complained the cartoons amounted to hate speech.

                                                                      

Professor Wichman fired off the following e-mail to the students.

Dear Moslem Association,

As a professor of Mechanical Engineering here at MSU I intend to protest your protest. I am offended not by cartoons, but by more mundane things like beheadings of civilians, cowardly attacks on public buildings, suicide murders, murders of Catholic priests (the latest in Turkey), burnings of Christian churches, the continued persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt, the imposition of Sharia law on non-Muslims, the rapes of Scandinavian girls and women (called 'whores' in your culture), the murder of film directors in Holland, and the rioting and looting in Paris France.

This is what offends me, a soft-spoken person and academic, and many, many of my colleagues. I counsel you dissatisfied, aggressive, brutal, and uncivilized slave-trading Moslems to be very aware of this as you proceed with your infantile 'protests.' If you do not like the values of the West - see the 1st Amendment - you are free to leave.

I hope for God's sake that most of you choose that option. Please return to your ancestral homelands and build them up yourselves instead of troubling Americans.

Cordially,

I. S. Wichman

Professor of Mechanical Engineering

So far, the college’s board of regents have refused to censure Professor Wichman, but I question whether Professor Wichman would have received this support had he been teaching at any of the Ivy League schools.  Moreover, this appears to be the flip side of cases like that of Ward Churchill and other left-wing professors have made outlandish statements. This brings up several questions regarding academic freedom and a professor’s right to speak out.

Questions:

At what point should a professor be censured for his speech?

At what point should a professor be fired for his political speech?

Can a standards for academic speech even be set?

Is the End Near for Osama bin Laden?

An interesting shift is taking place in Islam. Yesterday, Osama bin Laden broadcast another proclamation from his cave, but instead of the usual Death to America speech, , bin Laden denounced Arab leaders for sacrificing the Palestinians.  Osama bin Laden is now urging Muslim militants to liberate the Gaza by going to war with Arab regimes that have aligned themselves with Israel.  These regimes include Saudi Arabia, Quatar, Kuwait, and Jordan.   He devoted much of his speech to Egypt, who he urged to use force to break the blockade around the Gaza.  Bin Laden called Arab leaders “agents of the crusaders” and “wolves.”

It is interesting to note that bin Laden is now urging Muslims to ignore the Islamic prohibition against going to war with other Muslims.  Bin Laden gets around this prohibition by claiming the leaders of Muslim countries who support Israel are not governing according to Islamic law.

“Those (Arab) kings and leaders sacrificed Palestine and Al-Aqsa to keep their crowns, but we will not be relieved of this responsibility,” said bin Laden.

Bin Laden singled out the leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, for criticism.  He said Nasrallah has claimed he had enough money and men to fight Israel, but he has not fought to liberate Palestine.  Bin Laden was also critical of Iran, accusing it of trying to dominate the Middle-East.

Israel and Egypt have closed their borders with Gaza since Hamas seized control of the Palestinian territory in June last year. The closure brought about food and fuel shortages in the already impoverished strip where 1.4 million Palestinians live.

Questions:

What does all this mean?

Will this further fractionalize the militant Islamists?

Will those in militant Islam attack the heads of states, such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt?

Will this cause some in Islam to mark Osama bin Laden for death or capture?

Obama's Journey Towards Appeasement

Wow, President Bush hit a nerve when he spoke to Israel’s Knesset.   Barack Obama and the usual suspects in the Democratic Party went ballistic.  So, what did Bush say that upset our liberal friends?  Bush spoke to Israel’s parliament on the 60th anniversary of the founding of the Jewish state, and as would have been expected, he pledged U.S. support for Israel and placed Iran on notice.  I am quoting much of President Bush’s speech, because it was a good speech, a speech that Churchill would have been proud to make.   "America is with you in breaking up terrorist networks and denying the extremists' sanctuary. And America stands with you in firmly opposing Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. Permitting the world's leading sponsor of terror to possess the world's deadliest weapon would be an unforgivable betrayal of future generations. For the sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon," said Bush.

Bush’s speech could have been given by a European leader before one of the crusades.  “The fight against terror and extremism is the defining challenge of our time. It is more than a clash of arms. It is a clash of visions, a great ideological struggle… This struggle is waged with the technology of the 21st century, but at its core it is an ancient battle between good and evil. The killers claim the mantle of Islam, but they are not religious men. No one who prays to the God of Abraham could strap a suicide vest to an innocent child, or blow up guiltless guests at a Passover Seder, or fly planes into office buildings filled with unsuspecting workers. In truth, the men who carry out these savage acts serve no higher goal than their own desire for power. They accept no God before themselves.

President Bush goes on to make it quite clear that the U.S. and Israel are now together in the struggle against radical Islam.  “And that is why the founding charter of Hamas calls for the "elimination" of Israel. And that is why the followers of Hezbollah chant "Death to Israel, Death to America!" That is why Osama bin Laden teaches that "the killing of Jews and Americans is one of the biggest duties," said Bush.

“Then Bush turned his attention to the naïve among us.  “There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It's natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously.  Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.

“President Bush then goes on to utter those lines that caused a hysterical breakdown within the Democratic leadership.  “Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.

“Some people suggest if the United States would just break ties with Israel, all our problems in the Middle East would go away. This is a tired argument that buys into the propaganda of the enemies of peace, and America utterly rejects it. Israel's population may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong, because the United States of America stands with you,” said Bush.

“It is questionable whether Obama really took that much offense to President Bush’s comments or he simply saw this as a good opportunity to stir a national debate about the merits of face-to-face discussions with our adversaries in the Middle-East.  If that was Obama’s intent, then he has succeeded.  There are pros and cons to face-to-face discussions – and we will hear them all in the next few months.”

Questions: 

Is it wise to enter into sit-downs with the leaders of Hamas or Hezbollah?

Should our President meet with the President of Iran?

Obama has cited previous cases where U.S. Presidents have met successfully with our enemies.  He cites Reagan and Gorbachev, and Nixon and Mao as examples.  Did it work then and will it work now?

Should We Close our Military Prison at Guantanamo?

A friend and I got into a discussion the other night about our military prison in Guantanamo Bay.  He was outraged at the idea that the detainees were on American soil without having the rights and benefits of a detained suspect in our criminal courts.  Ah, where does one start.  Perhaps with this week’s news from the BBC in Iraq:  “Guantanamo Man' in Iraq bombing.”  It seems one Mr. Abdullah al-Ajmi, a former guest at our facilities in Guantanamo Bay took part in a suicide bomb attack in Mosul that killed several members of the Iraqi security forces on April 29.  Abdullah al-Ajmi had been in U.S. custody in Gitmo and because he was a Kuwaiti, the U.S. transferred him to Kuwait in 2005 where he was acquitted of terrorist charges.  More than 80 prisoners have been transferred to other countries, and over 200 have been released.

According to reports, Abdullah al-Ajmi and two alleged accomplices obtained new passports before going to Mosul through Syria.  Once in Iraq, the trio detonated two car bombs that killed the several members of the Iraqi security forces.

The ACLU  and an battalion of defense lawyers tried to make the case that these military combatants should be tried as criminals in the U.S. courts.  Apparently the Supreme Court cringed at the idea of seeing 400 O.J. style trials, so in a 6-3 decision they gave the U.S. Military Tribunals sole jurisdiction at this time.   

What exactly would the three presidential candidates do about our military prison in Guantanamo is unclear, but if Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton get into office, they are pledging to bring the troops home, so presumedly the prison at Gitmo would no longer be necessary.

Questions:

If the war in Iraq and Afghanistan continues, what should be done with the 400+ prisoners in Guantanamo?

If we withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, will the prisoners simply be released?

Do Military Tribunals provide adequate justice for detainees?
Should we close the prison at Gitmo and move it to Iraq or the Middle-East?

What will John McCain do with Gitmo if he is elected President?

What would Hillary or Obama do if elected?

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?

Brigitte Bardot, the French, and Islam

Sometimes it is easy to forget that we enjoy enormous freedoms in this country.  One of these is the freedom of speech.  The French sex-kitten of the ‘60s and ‘70s, Brigitte Bardot, is being tried for violating France's antiracism laws because she published a letter to then-Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, charging Muslims with destroying France.

Apparently the 73-year old movie star became fed up with the influx of Muslim immigrants moving to France.  France has Europe’s largest Muslim population with over 5 million, who now make up 8% of the population.

French prosecutors are asking the court to fine Bardot about $25,000 and put her in jail for up to two years for saying the Muslim community was "destroying our country and imposing its acts."  The outspoken Bardot has four prior convictions for inciting racial hatred by making controversial remarks about Islam and its followers.  Prior convictions resulted in her paying fines between $1,500 and $5,000.

"I am fed up with being under the thumb of this population which is destroying us, destroying our country and imposing its acts," said Bardot.
Bardot, who is an animal rights activist, said France is being invaded by sheep-slaughtering Muslims.

The fact is, most of the people in the world do not enjoy the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press that the people of the U.S. enjoy.
A few years ago, a person who openly said the Holocaust was a myth found himself in a Canadian prison.  He was convicted of hate speech.

Bardot will have to wait another 2-3 weeks to find out the sentence of the court. 

The questions are:  Will political correctness in this country eventually be given the full force and weight of law?   Will we become like France?   Can it happen here?