Sunday, February 26, 2006

Profiling for Peace: The Campaign Manifest

Can BOTH sides of the aisle agree on these 26 things as a stepping stone to further dialogue? Personally, I don't think so...

This was taken straight from Michael Smerconish's website. For those of you who are unaware who he is... He is a former lawyer with a morning talk radio show in Philadelphia. I have no idea why he hasn't been syndicated yet. He is the author of Flying Blind: How Political Correctness Continues to Compromise Airline Safety Post 9/11 and Muzzled: From T-Ball to Terrorism-True Stories.

...Maybe before you read it, you should read this letter from an "Ex-Muslim". The link was sent to me via email and I can in no way vouch for its authenticity, but it was a chilling read.

Profiling for Peace: The Campaign Manifest
by Michael A. Smerconish, Esq.

THINGS are ugly in America. The partisanship and bickering is unlike anything I can remember.

It's gotten so bad you have to choose your storm coverage by whether you're from a red or blue state. CNN concentrates on the blame game. Fox is effusive in its coverage of the relief. Somewhere in the middle lies the truth.

When I practiced law, I used something called a "request for admissions." It's intended to eliminate from factual dispute that which the parties can agree on. When I would issue a request pre-trial, it would usually consist of about two dozen simple statements that I would ask my adversary to "admit." ("It was sunny in New York City at 9 a.m. on Sept. 11, 2001.") The agreed-on statements would be accepted as fact at a trial.

Well, with the clarity that comes from a two-week vacation, here's my request for admissions, submitted to the American people, concerning the war and the storm, as the fourth anniversary of 9/11 approaches.

Admit or deny:

1. 9/11 was the work of radical Islam.

2. Post-9/11, there was a consensus to be "forward-leaning" with regard to radical Islam, meaning to be pre-emptive if needed to protect against further attack.

3. Iraq played no role in the events of 9/11.

4. Iraq was nevertheless perceived by American and foreign military and intelligence operations to pose a threat based principally upon the belief that Saddam Hussein possessed WMDs.

5. Saddam's perceived possession of WMDs was the primary reason advanced by the Bush administration in support of the invasion of Iraq.

6. It is now apparent that Saddam had no WMDs, meaning, the administration's predicate for going to war was faulty.

7. Hussein was still an evil SOB.

8. The fact that the administration was wrong does not mean the president lied on WMDs.

9. The war in Iraq is going poorly.

10. It is entirely possible that when all is said and done, we will have facilitated the replacement of Saddam with a leadership regime that is beholden to Iran and unfriendly to the U.S., albeit one that does not equal the evil of Saddam nor the type of threat that he could have become.

11. Leaving Iraq now would embolden insurgents and terrorists.

12. Our presence in Iraq provides a rallying point for the insurgency and the radical Islamists.

13. Leaving Iraq as soon as possible must be our goal.

14. It's time for the administration to set a timetable to leave Iraq.

15. It's reasonable to assume that many National Guardsmen who would otherwise have been in America, and in a position to respond to Hurricane Katrina, are instead in Iraq.

16. The president did not cause Hurricane Katrina.

17. The immediate federal response to the hurricane was poor.

18. The first response of the city of New Orleans was inadequate.

19. Among the victims in New Orleans, the worst hit were the poor, most of who are black.

20. The city has a black mayor.

21. Those who accuse the federal government of "racism" in its response have been silent with regard to the city's black mayor.

22. Blacks were the worst hit because, as a group, they were the least economically able to cope with the emergency and were least likely to have access to transportation or alternative accommodations. Many simply refused to leave.

23. A person who steals food during Hurricane Katrina in the absence of relief from local, state or federal governments is doing what is necessary for survival.

24. A person who steals a flat screen during it is a looter.

25. Four years after 9/11, we don't appear prepared to cope with the aftermath of a large-scale attack.

26. Four years after 9/11, we remain vulnerable to attack by radical Islam because political correctness blinds us to the commonalities of those who seek to kill us.

---I realize that Michael is trying to form a starting point to begin a dialogue --a consensus in the middle where we can all begin. The problem is that I HIGHLY doubt that everyone can even agree on these 26 things... But maybe I'm wrong (there are a few I'm not even sure I agree with...)

No comments: