 |
 |
||
|
|
|||
 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
The Worst Case Scenario On May 9, President Bush signed the "National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive" that establishes a new national continuity coordinator whose job it is to make plans for "National Essential Functions" of all federal, state, local, territorial and tribal governments as well as private sector organizations that would, in a national emergency, continue to function under directives from the president’s office.
To my way of thinking the entire debate over the immigration law reforms misses the real and most immediate threat. Without secure borders and, most importantly, an aggressive program to identify those who are among us for the purpose of destroying the nation, no reform is of any value. Recently, a reporter challenged the President, asking if he was still a credible messenger of the threat posed by al Qaeda. Bush replied he is because he reads the intelligence reports every day. Maybe he needs to tell us a lot more about what they are saying and what they predict. Maybe what all Americans need is a lot more paranoia? Or have we already forgotten those New Jersey jihadists planning mass murder at Fort Dix? Or the jihadists who planned to blow up jet fuel tanks at JFK airport? Paul L. Williams has written "The Day of Islam: The Annihilation of America and the Western World" ($25.00, Prometheus Books) in which he documents the near certainty that Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda has acquired the capacity to destroy American cities with nuclear devices. After reading it, one is inclined to believe that it is not a question of if this will occur, but when. Right now, Americans may be unhappy with events in Iraq and eager to leave, but I think the shock and horror have 9/11 has long since worn off. We may be edgy over why bin Laden has not been captured and why the focus of our efforts have not been on destroying al Qaeda, but this is not a burning issue in the midst of the national debate about Iraq. The United States, despite many attacks orchestrated by al Qaeda, remained largely indifferent to it in the decade leading up to 9/11. As Michael Scheurer, a former CIA operative in charge of the bin Laden file and author of "Imperial Hubris", has written, "We found that he (bin Laden) and al Qaeda were involved in an extraordinary sophisticated and professional effort to acquire weapons of mass destruction—in this case, nuclear weapons, so by the end of 1996, it was clear that this was an organization unlike any other one we had ever seen." In page after page of his book, Williams documents the events and the personalities involved in the process by which al Qaeda likely has nuclear weapons. The difference between our former adversary, the Soviet Union, and al Qaeda was that the Soviets were not driven by any religious belief that demanded our destruction. Al Qaeda’s mission is to establish a global Islamic Caliphate and to do that, the destruction of America, Israel and the West is an essential element. Indeed, bin Laden hasn’t even made an effort to deny al Qaeda has nuclear capabilities. Two months after 9-11, he gave an interview in which he said, "If America uses chemical or nuclear weapons, then we may respond with chemical or nuclear weapons." When the Pakistani journalist asked how he obtained such weapons, bin Laden replied, "It is not difficult, not if you have contacts in Russia with other militant groups. They are available for $10 million and $20 million." This was not just an idle threat, but the reality of how easily off-the-shelf nuclear weapons could be purchased from Russian sources. As for the money, the poppy fields of Afghanistan in 1997 produced enough raw opium to sweeten the coffers of al Qaeda and its affiliates to the tune of upwards of $16 billion a year. They are reputed to be the source of eighty percent of the heroin sold annually these days. Al Qaeda has long been established in South America, working closely with the drug cartels. The United States and Europe are major markets. Just how easy would it be to smuggle small nuclear devices into the United States? Stephen Flynn, a senior fellow for national security studies at the US Council of Foreign Relations, has noted that, "The United States has 16,000 ships entering its ports every day. Adding in shipments by truck, train, or air freight, the total number of import shipments to the U.S. is 21.4 million tons a year." Less than three percent of ship containers are ever inspected and that includes those from the Middle East. The U.S. is concerned that Iran is moving toward the acquisition of nuclear weapons capabilities, but Pakistan already has nukes of its own, and those nukes in the Russian arsenal that we haven’t already spent billions to decommission are still said to be extraordinarily vulnerable to the black market in fissionable uranium and plutonium. So, in the worst-case scenario that seems closer with every passing day, we could see New York, Washington, D.C., and other key cities destroyed. If that happens, the President’s latest directive may prove meaningless and the plans that al Qaeda has been making for a very long time will come true. To keep you informed on the events and issues of our times, the Center requires your financial support. Please send a donation of any amount so that we may continue to make sense of a complex world. If you would prefer to send the Center a check, please make it payable to The Caruba Organization, 29 West Third St., Suite 1321, South Orange, NJ 07079. Thank you! The World According to Hillary When I voted for George W. Bush in 2000, it was because I thought that Al Gore was seriously nuts. I haven’t had any reason to believe otherwise in the years since then. The man has that weird, slightly out of synch look in his eyes, and a demagogue’s love of his own voice proclaiming the end of the world if we don’t do what he says. I get the same crazy vibe off of Hillary Clinton, but for different reasons. Her candidacy reeks of blind ambition. Bill Clinton had a mysterious charm despite all his personal failings, but Hillary lacks any warmth and any principles. Both are skilled liars, but Bill lied for a reason. Hillary needs no reason.
Then, too, it’s worth keeping in mind the way today’s K-through-12 educational system no longer bothers to actually teach reading, writing and arithmetic. Instead, the emphasis is on teaching liberal values. It’s "education" that can literally force a student to sit through Al Gore’s crazy "documentary" about the environment in several different classes. Indoctrination? Oh, yes. Actual skills? Oh, no. Some political prognosticators are convinced Hillary will get the Democrat nomination and will win. Some were convinced that McGovern, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry would win as well. By the time they made it to the finish line, the voters had other ideas. Sometimes it was a landslide defeat. Sometimes we dodged a bullet by a handful of votes. Of course, the voters don’t always get it right. On occasion we vote in feckless people with few morals like Bill Clinton or we vote in a dry drunk like George W. Bush who speaks only to Laura and God. It says a lot that people like Laura a lot more than George W. It says a lot more than George W. has betrayed every conservative principle of governance. People never really did like Hillary. Her healthcare program, prepared in secret, and insanely intent on taking over the entire nation’s healthcare system, was soundly rejected. Good thing, too. It was the mirror of every totalitarian governmental program ever concocted. Of course, she still got to keep her job as First Lady, but that came with a price, Bill and Monica. On the campaign trail, Hillary is saying she wants to replace an "on your own" society with one based on "shared" responsibility and prosperity, but this has been tried in Russia, China, and as socialism in Europe and South America. It does not work. It will never work. That didn’t deter Hillary, however. Let Bill retire to being a senior statesman making millions, Hillary set her eyes on the presidency via the U.S. Senate, abandoning Arkansas where she had to endure being a governor’s wife, to the comforts of the Democrat haven of New York State. Republicans abandoned any hope of defeating her. If Republicans repeat that error, we are all in for a world of trouble unlike anything this nation has ever seen. Forget about al Qaeda. Forget about Hugo Chavez. Forget about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Hillary will, if permitted, will become Big Sister, insuring that the federal government takes money from the rich, from you, and gives it to everyone else but you. In what are surely the most frightening words she has uttered, in June 2004 she famously said, "We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." Karl Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Castro or Hugo Chavez could not have said it better. As Bay Buchanan has written, "Hillary’s view of government is simple. It is to remold society. It can do so by coercion, as in the case of health care; by indoctrination, as in the case of education; or by redistributing the wealth through tax and spend policies. It is pure, unadulterated socialism, the type that is forced upon a people by their government." That bid to spend $10 billion in order to separate toddlers from their parents and put them in the tender care of strangers is just a hint of Hillary’s desire to spend public monies. In her book, "The Extreme Makeover of Hillary (Rodham) Clinton", Bay Buchanan notes that, "During her first two years in office she sponsored or cosponsored 169 bills that would have increased spending by $124 billion, and not a one that would have reduced it. The following couple years the old girl outdid herself, sponsoring or cosponsoring 211 bills that would have increased spending and three bills that would have reduced it, for a total net cost of $378 billion…" Markos Moulitas, the founder of the liberal political blog, Daily Kos, has said, "She doesn’t have a single memorable policy or legislative accomplishment to her name." To which we should probably add, "Thank God!" It is also an effective way to avoid taking responsibility for any program. Lastly, let us recall that Hillary voted for the pre-emptive war on Iraq. If you want a woman as Commander-in-Chief, be prepared for someone with more of an instinct for war than her male counterparts. Given the results of our latest conflict, this does not bode well. President Bush may be stubborn in his resistance to changing policy, but Bay Buchanan concludes that "Hillary is remarkable—she is unrestrained by any previous position she has ever taken." Zigging and zagging through the hard choices that have to be made for America in the years ahead is not policy. It is indecision. It is insecurity. It is the template of Hillary’s life. Have you donated to the Center yet? We are dependent on the financial support of visitors to this website like you. Any amount is welcome. If you prefer to send a check, please send it to The Caruba Organization, 28 West Third Street, Suite 1321, South Orange, NJ 07079. Thank you!
©
2007 Alan Caruba. |
||||||||||||||||||||
Since paranoia is now the established frame of reference for all political discussions, the conservative media focused on whether Bush was planning to become a dictator in the event of a national emergency. All modern presidents, however, have issued comparable directives or executive orders. Bush is not the first to stare the physical destruction of America in the eye on a daily basis.
What Hillary wants is to create a government that controls everyone’s life frombirth to death. In late May she proposed that the federal government provide states up to $10 billion so that all four-year-olds can have pre-kindergarten education. It didn’t sound voluntary. Why should a child that young even need such a thing? Unless, of course, we have progressed to the point where the state can have people visit your home to determine if you are a fit parent and, if they decide otherwise, take your child away and give it to someone else. We are not that far from that future horror.