Two Ways of Rewriting History

In the midst of the Great Civil War, the war to determine if a Nation conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, could long endure; President Abraham Lincoln faced the bitter attack of the Democrat Party. The Democrats put forward General George Brinton McClellan to run against Lincoln, and built their platform around a plank demanding an end to the war; a war which Democrats labeled a failure. Let’s talk about rewriting history. What if the Democrats had won that election? Where would the world be today if this nation, under God . . . a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, had perished from the earth?

The Democrats of 1864 were far more interested in gaining control of the White House and the Congress than they were in ending slavery and preserving the United States of America. It seems that party’s motivations and practices have changed little in the past one and a half centuries.

In the midst of so much rewriting of history, I thought it appropriate to take a journey back to the un-rewritten pages of history to seek perspective and truth. On February 26, 2003 – less than a month before a Coalition of thirty-five nations, lead by the United States, launched Operation Iraqi Freedom; President Bush outlined the reasons for removing Saddam Hessian from power in Iraq. He not only dealt with the reasons for going to war but clearly outlined the difficulty of the task ahead. The selective memory of those who now claim that the President lied about the reasons for and difficulty of the war requires us to deal with the truths in this call to action.

Reasons for War:

1. Because 9/11 has made the United States a battlefield in the Great War of the 21st Century.

2. Because the greatest danger is an outlaw regime arming with Weapons of Mass Destruction. (I point out that the Doffer report has clearly stated that Saddam had in place monies, technologies, and desires to reconstitute the weapons he had used in the past and to develop nuclear weapons.)

3. Because the Iraqi dictator was building Weapons of Mass Destruction. (This was a position held by the UN, all nations with established intelligence organizations, the Democrats and Republicans in congress, the military, the CIA, and even Joe Wilson.)

4. Because Saddam had close ties with terror. (Not 9/11 but with terror – Saddam was running terror training camps, giving money to families of suicide bombers, and providing refuge to al Queda terrorists escaping from Afghanistan.)

5. Because a free Iraq would help to insure the long term safety and security of the world.

6. Because it was necessary to stop Saddam’s regime from spreading discord and violence in the Middle East.

7. Because the liberation of Iraq will allow the power of freedom to transform a region – bringing hope and progress to millions.

8. Because a free and peaceful Iraq will provide the liberty Americans believe in and the security it needs.

9. Because Iraqis live in scarcity and fear in a police state maintained by secret police and torture chambers, and terror. The lives of Iraqis mean little to Saddam, but they do matter to the U.S.

10. Because free nations do not breed ideologies of murder.

11. Because the liberation of Iraq will serve as an inspiration to other peoples suffering under regimes maintained by murder and terror that if they fight they can do so with hope of success.

12. Because the Iraqi people desire to be safe from brutality and oppression.

13. Because the liberation of Iraq will begin a new stage of Middle East peace. (And it has – yesterday the new Palestinian government took over control of its own national border for the first time.)

14. Because ending Saddam’s regime will cut off a wealthy patron that pays for terrorist training and offers rewards to families of suicide bombers.

15. Because the liberation of Iraq will serve as a warning to others not to support terror.

16. Because the removal of Saddam will encourage Palestinians to abandon terror.

17. Because removal of the Saddam regime will enable support for a Palestinian state.

18. Because freedom in Iraq will break the old patterns of hate.

19. Because victory over terror, war, and murder will bring peace.

20. Because following through on the commitments of the UN will make the UN a viable organization. (Not one steeped in oil and blood money)

21. Because the defeat of a murderous dictator and outlaw regime will signal other out- laws that they cannot ignore the will of the civilized world.

22. Because only such a significant change can end Middle East violence and its world wide effects.

President Bush spoke of the difficulty of the war long before it began:

1. It will be difficult to bring stability and unity to that part of the world, but any future will be better than the present.

2. It will be difficult not to allow one Dictator to replace another.

3. It will be difficult to rebuild a nation devastated by a generation of brutalization by a dictator.

4. “It will be difficult to help freedom take hold in a country that has known three decades of dictatorship, secret police, internal divisions, and war.”

5. “It will be difficult to cultivate liberty and peace in the Middle East, after so many generations of strife."

President Bush invokes the memories of Lincoln’s battle against slavery, of Roosevelt’s and Truman’s battle against Fascism and Japanese Militarism, of Reagan’s battle against Communism when he ends his pre-war address by claiming, “Yet, the security of our nation and the hope of millions depend on us, and Americans do not turn away from duties because they are hard. We have met great tests in other times, and we will meet the tests of our time.”

The Democrat political party is now willing to ignore and jeopardize all these important reasons and valuable goals, to give up the difficult fight for a better future of the world, in their disingenuous screaming of “Bush Lied; People Died”. Their only goal is to damage President Bush and gain political power for themselves. In one hundred and forty-one years the goals of the Democrats have not changed.

If Lincoln’s enemies had had their way, two antagonistic nations, one slave and one free, would have battled out the nineteenth and twentieth centuries; warring for territory and power; destroying each other while the monsters in Europe gobbled up the world in Communism, Fascism, and genocide. Slavery would have dragged on into another century of injustice brewing “a fire in the night” that would have dwarfed the “first” civil war in its terror and destructive might.

Now, we must ask ourselves, what if Saddam Hussein’s power would have remained unchecked in ambition and hate. Even John Kerry, who was one of the leaders of the anti- war movement of the 60’s and 70’s that led to the murder and enslavement of millions in South East Asia, cannot bear to contemplate that terror. Yet, to gain power the Democrats are willing to endanger us all, and set the world back into the hand of terrorists and terror states. Let’s remember history – not rewrite it for the momentary expedience of the Democrat political party.

The Bird and the Box

It must have been a late spring up north because the golden plovers were all over town; not above the artic circle where they belonged. As a little boy growing up in Anchorage, Alaska, seeing wild life was nothing new, but this sea of birds that washed over our fields and forests was wonderful. Hunter instincts raged in the hearts of my buddy, Lawrence White and myself, and we set about to ‘catch us some birds’! The plan was to carefully balance a pasteboard box on a stick attached to a long string. A trail of bread bits would lead the unsuspecting plover into the trap, then a yank on the string and he would be ours. We sat in the bushes for hours watching the clouds of birds come down to cover the lawn around our box. They would come like falling rain, in squalls of tens and twelves, then explode into the air all at once like a hurricane of beating wings and erry calls; spooked by some too quick move or careless sound. Over and over again they churned between earth and sky, but not one paid the slightest attention to our box. There were so many birds that it seemed the mere force of the building mass would push one into our snare, but not a bird showed any interest in bread or box. At last I lost it and stood up. The plovers were gone in a roaring cloud. I kicked the box and headed home. Lawrence called bitterly after me; he cried warm tears. Why wouldn’t I stay? How could I abandon him? Surly, with so many plovers, one would be ours if we would just wait long enough. I went and got my 22 and shot a few. We didn’t speak for weeks.

For two years the media and their stoolies in the Democrat Party have crafted and tended the Valeri Plame trap. Now, after failing to coax in any birds and with nothing to show for their years of casting their bread upon the waters, Bob Woodward has kicked out the stick and left the Left with nothing but bitter tears.

Perusal of Fox News reports for Friday, November 18th (referenced here in my attempt to reach up to recent standards in the Agora) shows the falling out of media buddies.

Woodward, once the patron saint of investigative journalists, is now the subject of angry and pouting disappointment. Critics charge that Woodward has become too cozy with Sources. One wonders where such media wise-guys were when Woodward was wooing Deep Throat. Colleagues at the Washington Post sob that “people feel let down!” Why; because Woodward told the truth and crushed the carefully crafted snare the media had built for President Bush?

Close Woodward friend, Walter Pincus (I couldn’t have made up a more fitting name) insists he can’t remember that Woodward told him about Plame two weeks before Libby is alleged to have blown her cover. How convenient for media types, they need have no memory of the facts. Too bad the poor souls they ensnare aren’t given an equal latitude of tolerance. By the way, Pincus is already in contempt of Court for failing to disclose a leaker, but that is only a crime if you’re a bird slated for the box.

It seems Woodward is already in trouble for telling the truth about the Scooter (where do they get these names) witch hunt. Woodward has claimed that this tea pot tempest is a pretty crumby case and not at all significant. This degradation of the carefully crafted box trap; dropped Woodward from media hero to Bush flunky in a wing flick.

Woodward’s revelation has kicked the sticks out from under the box of Prosecutor Fitzgereld’s teetering trap. The prosecutor’s clam that “He [Libby] was at the beginning of the chain of phone calls, the first official to disclose this information outside the government to a reporter”, has not only fallen flat, it has been stepped on.

In his own defense, Woodward states, “People want reporters to use information as a political weapon. I won’t do that. I’m just trying to find out what happened and report it as accurately as possible.” Woodward’s memory is a little foggy. Those outside the media box have a better memory of the political ramifications of Watergate, or has all that Deep Throat stuff started stinging Woodward’s conscience. Let’s hope so!

Two Talks Tell Total Tale

On Veterans Day 2005, two men gave two speeches. The contrasts of these two agenda driven talks could not be more telling of the character of the two speakers and the causes they represent.

In a speech before a group of academics in Hempstead New York, Bill Clinton defended his presidency.

In a speech before assembled servicemen and the families of warriors and veterans at Tobyhanna Army Depot, President George Bush defended the fight for freedom.

Clinton’s speech centered around his impeachment, which he called an ‘egregious’ abuse of the Constitution and he challenged those who claim history will consider him a poor president because of his White House sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky.

President Bush’s speech centered on the service of America’s military in the creation and preservation of freedom for America and the world and the danger presented by those who would rewrite history to serve political ends.

Clinton, whose presidency saw neither, claimed an economic turn around and Middle East peace initiatives as his accomplishments.

Bush, whose presidency has seen the turn around of the Clinton Recession and the establishment of a new Palestinian government and the withdrawal of Israel from Palestinian territory, outlined the five difficult steps he is leading America through the global war on Terror. 1) Preventing attacks of terrorist networks before they occur. 2) Denying weapons of mass destruction to outlaw regimes. 3) Denying radical groups the support and sanctuary of outlaw regimes. 4) Denying militants control of any nation. 5) Denying the militants future recruits by replacing hatred and resentment with democracy and hope.

Clinton challenged his critics by using deceit; arguing that his impeachment was not about what he called his “misconduct.”

Bush challenged his critics by speaking the truth; “While it’s perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began. Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war. These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community’s judgments related to Iraq’s weapons program.”

Bush continues: “they also know that intelligence agencies from around the world agreed with our assessment of Saddam Hussein. They know the United Nations passed more than a dozen resolutions citing his development and possession of weapons of mass destruction. And many of these critics supported my opponent during the last election, who explained his position to support the resolution in the Congress this way: “When I voted to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security.” [John Kerry] That’s why more than a hundred Democrats in the House and the Senate – who had access to the same intelligence – voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power.”

Bush adds: “The stakes in this global war on terror are too high, and the national interest is too important, for politicians to throw out false charges. These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America’s will.”

Thus we have two men giving speeches which reveal the goals and interests that drive them.

Clinton’s goal, as was the goal of his entire presidency, his own self aggrandizement. Thus he sets out to rewrite history to fit his ends. Clinton’s claims of greatness are laughable to the informed and are plausible only to the ignorant.

President Bush’s goal, as has been the goal of his entire presidency, to spread freedom and peace. He seeks to set the slanted record straight and does so by presenting the facts and asking thinking people to come to a just conclusion.

The Fisherman and the Genie

One of my favorite stories from the 1001 Nights Entertainment is the “Fisherman and the Genie”. In the story, a poor fisherman drags a great jug out of the sea. When he opens it, a genie appears and demands the fisherman choose how the poor fisherman wants to die. It seems the genie has been waiting so long to be released that he has grown angry with whoever will eventually release him. He has sworn to give his benefactor death as his reward. Of course the fisherman is taken aback – but he thinks to himself, “I MUST OUTWIT THE GENIE. SURELY I MUST BE SMARTER THAN HE; FOR EVIL SPIRITS WOULD NOT BE EVIL IF THEY WOULD USE THEIR HEADS.”

The behaviors of many evil doers in the world today seem to bear out the Fisherman’s pronouncement:

1. I think of the rioters in Toledo, Ohio a week or so ago. Enraged that a group of Nazis were about to march through a portion of their city, a bunch of “civil rights demonstrators” proceeded to attack their own community. Claiming that the Nazis supported violence, a mob of idiots proceeded to commit the most gratuitous acts of violence. Eager to grab headlines, many Ohio blacks behaved exactly as the Nazi hate mongers predicted they would. Talk about playing into the hand of your enemy in order to prove their point!

2. I think of the “peaceful and sophisticated” citizens of France who for approaching two weeks now have been rioting and burning down their own communities. Overcome by boredom, impotence, and raciest bigotry they have turned upon themselves. We are reminded that these are the descendants of the same people who turned a Revolution for Freedom into a Reign of Terror. Now the French (need I really come up with a pejorative more telling) grope for attention on the world stage by committing national suicide. How like them!

3. Think of protestors in Argentina during the meeting of the leaders of the nations of North and South America. In a ridiculous, if not laughable, attempt to get the attention of the world media, anarchist protestors destroy and burn; providing proof that their way must be avoided by thinking people at all costs.

4. Democrats, seeking to gin up some press for their anti Bush agenda, - the only agenda the Democrats in office in this country seem to possess - burst into flames last week. The obligatory crash which followed was spectacular. Failing to get any significant indictments against the “movers and shakers” in the Bush administration for the non crime of outing the non covert agent wife of a non reliable Joe Wilson, the Senate Minority Leader, Harry Reid, proposed to kill the nation that gives him freedom. In a publicity stunt that was all hot air, Reid dragged the U.S. Senate in to an unnecessary closed session to demand things which have already been done be done again. He was forced later to recognize, if not admit, that the “re-do” was already scheduled before his tantrum. Thus the Democrats blocked the business of the nation in order to grandstand for the political points the media rushes provide. Meanwhile the fishermen, and farmers, the workers and owners, the simple minded citizens of American, realize that politicians who thus refuse to use their heads must surely be evil.

The fisherman in Scheherazade’s tale at last convinces the evil genie to go back into his bottle. The Fisherman does this with a simple appeal to the genie’s ego. He asks the “wonderful genie” to prove that someone as great as he could actually fit into the jug. Determined to prove himself possessed of the greatness the fisherman implies, the evil genie turns himself into smoke and reenters the bottle. The fisherman replaces the stopper. The media has given full reign to the monsters of the moment, and their egos are swollen with hot air to the bursting point. I wonder if now the media has pulled the cork, the simple citizens of this nation will be able to get the genie back in the bottle. Perhaps their first step is realizing just how stupid the evil doers really are.