I told hom no more political email. He is trying to masquerade this as Non political. what hateful garbage.
This is very good! SF
Long read but worth the time...Lancer
THE WORLD SITUATION - A LETTER TO MY SONS
This was written by a retired attorney, to his sons, May 19, 2004.
Dear Tom, Kevin, Kirby and Ted,
As your father, I believe I owe it to you to share some thoughts on the
present world situation. We have over the years discussed a lot of
important things, like going to college, jobs and so forth. But this really
takes precedence over any of those discussions. I hope this might give you
a longer term perspective that fewer and fewer of my generation are left to
speak to. To be sure you understand that this is not politically flavored,
I will tell you that since Franklin D. Roosevelt, who led us through pre and
WWII (1933 - 1945) up to and including our present President, I have without
exception, supported our presidents on all matters of international
conflict. This would include just naming a few in addition to President
Roosevelt - WWII: President Truman - Korean War 1950; President Kennedy -
Bay of Pigs (1961); President Kennedy - Vietnam (1961); <1> eight
presidents (5 Republican & 4 Democrat) during the cold war (1945 - 1991);
President Clinton's strikes on Bosnia (1995) and on Iraq (1998). <2> So be
sure you read this as completely non-political or otherwise you will miss
the point.
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 11th, 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; Dar es Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998; Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000;
New York World Trade Center 2001; Pentagon 2001. (Note that during the
period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide). <3>
2. Why were we attacked?
Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened
during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, 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 predecessors,
Presidents Ford or Carter.
4. Who were the attackers?
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.
5. What is the Muslim population of the World?
25%
6. 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).
(
http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm). Thus, almost the same number of
Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the 6 million holocaust Jews who
were killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the Jewish
atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no
hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating 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, French or anyone else.. <5> 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 shut up or die?
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:
1. Can we lose this war?
2. What does losing really mean?
If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions.
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 to terrorist 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 on 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. See the attached article on the French condition by Tom Segel. <6>
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 Muslims, how could
anyone else? The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war and therefore
are completely committed to winning at any cost. We 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 really digging in and lending 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 we have
become accustomed to. 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 then. 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 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 people 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 enemy fighters who recently were burning Americans and dragging
their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq. And still more recently
the same type enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources
internationally, of the beheading of an American prisoner 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 this 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 absolutely oblivious to the magnitude
of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been
pushing us for many years. 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 in at least one respect. 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. They have
universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally
killing each other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we
ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the "peaceful
Muslims"?
I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are united,
there is no way that we can lose. I believe that 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.
Love,
Dad
<1> By the way on Vietnam, the emotions are still so high that it is really
not possible to discuss it. However, I think President Kennedy was correct.
He felt there was a communist threat from China, Russia and North Vietnam to
take over that whole area. Also remember that we were in a 'cold war' with
Russia. I frankly think Kennedy's plan worked and kept that total communist
control out, but try telling that to anyone now. It just isn't politically
correct to say so. Historians will answer this after cool headed research,
when the people closest to it are all gone.
<2> As you know, I am a strong President Bush supporter and will vote for
him. However, if Senator Kerry is elected, I will fully support him on all
matters of international conflict, just as I have supported all presidents
in the past.
<3> Source for statistics in Par. 1 is
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001454.html<4> The Institute of Islamic Information and Education.
http://www.iiie.net/Intl/PopStats.html<5> Note the attached article by Tom Segel referred to in footnote 6 infra,
the terrorist Muslim have already begun the havoc in France. (The note was
not attached to the E-mail I received. Gene)
<6> I checked this article with two sources - Hoax Busters and Urban Myths.
It does not come up as a Hoax on either. I also then E-mailed Mr. Segel and
he confirmed the article was his.
<7> "I don't think the Army or any branch of service runs any type of war
any more. It's done by senators and congressmen. There are too many
civilians involved." Returning Iraq veteran, Sgt. 1st Class Greg Klees as
quoted in the Cedar Rapids, IA Gazette on May 13th, 2004.
<8> There are 64 Muslim countries. This does not count countries like Spain
that are controlled by the Muslim terrorists.
~<>~
Carl Hutchinson
carlhutch@earthlink.net
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
