Excuse me, I think I’m gonna be sick…

It sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it?

How ridiculously unacceptable would it be to Americans if the growing Hispanic population decided they wanted to form their own Hispanic Republic in Texas based on ethnic and historical ties to Mexico? What if this concept, despite how ludicrous it may sound to Americans, was recognized and accepted by the rest of the world? It is widely accepted by most historians that the young United States Government under President James K. Polk provoked a war with Mexico to annex Texas and other western territories. Polk knew that the even younger Republic of Mexico was unorganized and not ready for war. What if the United Nations passed a resolution creating a new independent Hispanic Republic based on the history of the 1840s conflict between the United States and Mexico over Texas? How do you think the Bush Administration would respond to an International Tribunal charging our government of criminal wrongdoing based on the historical evidence leading up to and during the Mexican-American War of 1846? How would Americans respond to peace talks, resolutions and negotiations based on historical crimes of the United States that led to Texans being told they could not return to their former homes in the Lone Star State? How open would America be to a summit in which negotiations led to Texans acquiring, let’s say, the territory surrounding and including San Antonio and maybe a few additional geographic locations of historical importance? After all, San Antonio is a nice city & the home of the Alamo� Texans should be happy with that, right? However, the rest of Texas would remain off limits to these “refugees” of the former state because the new Hispanic government firmly believed the presence of Non-Hispanic people could possibly be a threat to national security. Texans forced to flee to bordering states in the U.S. due to the new Hispanic Republic’s military “Land Clearing” operations would not be allowed to return to their homes. Texans who remained under the new Hispanic Government would not have the rights of other citizens. They would be harassed at military checkpoints and have no concrete rights of suffrage. Texans who relocated into the designated San Antonio territory would have to watch helplessly as their economy sank into a downward spiral, while the economy of the new Hispanic state would receive international economic aide. Wouldn’t it be ironically unacceptable to the United States if the rest of the world heralded this arrangement as a wonderful, historic or even groundbreaking diplomatic achievement? Texans backed by the rest of the United States government and military would take up arms and fight. The leaders of the Texas refugee population would walk away from any kind of bargain or negotiations that did nothing for the people they represent in terms of reparations, land recovery, economic stimulus and support or the right of other Texans to return to their beloved Lone Star State. It seems so incredibly farfetched, doesn’t it? Why? Because it is the United States we are talking about. We have nuclear weapons, money and power. This is our homeland and we made it great. So what if there were Indians here before the Europeans came. So what if Mexico had a legal claim to Texas way back in the 1840s? They have about as much claim to this land now as the Israeli people have to lands in Palestine� Right? Well, maybe the Israeli people, who suffered through the atrocities of the Holocaust and have a 2000 year old mandate from THEIR GOD proclaiming Palestine to be their Promised Land, may just have a bit more of a case. Just maybe�

A sickening display of rhetorical maneuvering�

The rhetoric associated with the political maneuvering and “War on Terror” which is dominating the media during this latest crisis in the Middle East is enough to make me sick. If I hear one more Pro-Israeli or Bush administration official say anything else about how Yasser Arafat turned down the so-called more than generous offer made to the Palestinians at the Camp David Meeting with former President Clinton and former Israeli Prime Minister Barak I will THROW-UP!! When I hear these Israeli diplomats and government officials talk as if a cease-fire will only happen if Arafat stops using terror tactics, it is enough to give me a migraine. When I hear Colon Powell on N.P.R. saying that Palestinians must stop the violence, when it is their cities being reduced to rubble or when I see U.S. Senators and Representatives on television introducing bills before Congress designed to end aide to Palestinians if terror attacks continue against Israel, I feel my stomach churn and bubble. Israeli tanks and soldiers are destroying Palestinian cities and killing innocent people in an operation that is clearly OFFENSIVE, and these people are on television saying Israel has a right to defend itself? Now Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is saying he will attend a Middle East PEACE CONFERENCE, but he does not think an invitation should be extended to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat? Arafat, who has been deemed “Irrelevant” according to Sharon, is an obvious target for assassination. Israeli troops armed with tanks and guns are laying siege to his headquarters in what is now the rubble-reduced city of Ramallah. All they need is an excuse to go in and kill him. Sharon is actively trying to find the excuse he needs to give the order. If Arafat is assassinated, Palestinians will retaliate. Will Israeli and U.S. government officials still be telling the Palestinians to stop the violence after their leader has been targeted and eliminated by Ariel Sharon? Who is he to say who should attend a Peace Conference and who should not? Is there anyone in the Bush Administration, Congress or in the media unbiased enough to recognize that the level of Israeli-Palestinian violence increased dramatically when Sharon took office and implemented offensive military operations such as late night tank/bulldozer raids, assassinating top Palestinian officials he could label as terrorist and restricting Yasser Arafat’s movements. Now he wants to say who should and who should not be welcomed to attend a Middle East Peace Conference. Few men have spawned more terror for innocent people in the Arab World over the past 35 years than Ariel Sharon. It is just sickening and as a historian I find myself drawing on a reference once made by Malcolm X. He spoke of what it is to be a “diner”. Just because one is sitting at the dinner table does not make one a diner. The Palestinians are sitting at the dinner table with an empty plate. Bush, Powell, Sharon and many other diplomatic powerbrokers are enjoying a hearty meal and the Palestinians are forced to wait for the leftovers at their own dinner table. They have been given one choice� Watch the others eat. Everyone else can enjoy a great feast while the Palestinian people may be offered the leftovers of a territory that they should never have been forced to leave in the first place. PERIOD.

The Myth of Chairman Arafat’s “Iron Fist”?

There are few things that are clear when examining the circumstances of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. To any observer who chooses to view the current crisis and history of this conflict with an unbiased approach, one thing is clear. Both sides have top officials who have employed the use of terror tactics, yet it is only one side constantly having to fight the negative connotations associated with terrorism. It also appears to the unbiased eye, that Arafat has far less power to control Palestinian attacks on Israel than we are being led to believe. Additionally, it maybe quite possible that the Camp David proposal for a Palestinian State, which we are continuously reminded that Yasser Arafat turned down when he met with Clinton and former Israeli Prime Minister Barak, may not have been as wonderful as we are being led to believe. There was no Palestinian fallout when Yasser Arafat turned it down and walked away. Why? If the conditions set forth at Camp David with Clinton and Barak were so wonderful, why were there not serious attempts to criticize or replace Arafat by Palestinians after he turned it down? Perhaps the Palestinian people agreed with the decision made by Chairman Arafat? The Camp David agreement was simply not good enough for a group of people, who in many cases have been humiliated, terrorized, dehumanized, killed, and treated like 2nd or 3rd class citizens in a country the U.S. so eagerly calls “The only Democracy in he Middle East”. If you are Arab you see about as much democracy in Israel or the territories it illegally occupies as Black people saw in Mississippi during the Jim Crow Era. (My apologies to U.S. enthusiast who would consider such a statement to be nothing short of unpatriotic during the Bush Administrations indefinite “War on Terror”). If Yasser Arafat had accepted this “wonderful plan”, he would have far less clout with his people than he does now. To the untrained ear, news reports, editorials, political analysis and quotes taken from Bush and Sharon Administrations would have us believe that Arafat rules over the Palestinians and groups like Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad with corruption and “Iron Fist” tactics. I can only imagine how active Hamas and Islamic Jihad would be in producing suicide bombers and terrorizing innocent Israeli civilians had the Camp David terms been agreed to. Arafat barely has control over the Fatah movement, a group we are reminded that he founded every time another suicide bomber strikes an Israeli city. He would be even less influential had he agreed to the conditions set forth at Camp David. It seems that news analyst, politicians, radio host and all other supporters of Israel can’t say enough about how he walked away from the only chance he had to secure a Palestinian State. Why was this his best or only chance to secure a Palestinian State? Why is it necessary for Arafat to denounce violence and terror tactics before U.S. and Israeli officials will negotiate with him? What if the Palestinian Authority requested that Sharon and Israeli officials denounce the terror tactics they employ when they bulldoze Palestinian neighborhoods or shoot at ambulance drivers taking wounded civilians to receive medical care? Shouldn’t some Israeli spokesman or Israeli government official step forward and admit to the terror tactics associated with snipers shooting into Palestinian refugee camps when innocent women and children are moving about. Why is it only important that Yasser Arafat step forward and denounce the use of terror when it is clear to the whole world, with the exception of the U.S. and Israel, that he does not have the kind of “Iron Fist” authority over all of the Palestinian groups. More importantly, the rest of the world recognizes the terror tactics employed by BOTH SIDES. Unlike Arafat, Sharon does have complete control over the Israeli Defense Force (IDF). Sharon could engineer a shift in the Israeli policies of late night bulldozer operations, snipers, checkpoint humiliation, and killing innocent men, women and children. I have no doubt in my mind that the terror tactics employed by extreme Palestinian elements would reduce drastically if the so-called “defensive measures” taken by Sharon and the IDF were scaled back. Even U.S. politicians, who fear the scorn of the Anti-Defamation League, should be able to see that Sharon’s tactics are clearly offensive. Why is it only necessary for Arafat to denounce terror? Would Arafat making such a statement be the kind of feel good gesture that could make everyone involved want to participate in a group hug? It doesn’t matter if he denounces terrorism or not. He is the chosen leader of the Palestinians whether Bush and Sharon likes it or not. Does anyone think that his denouncing terrorism is going to stop Hamas and Islamic Jihad? Will Sharon really call off the tanks and bulldozers if Arafat says in a grand statement to the world that he denounces terrorism? Such a gesture on the part of Arafat would be nothing more than an empty/symbolic one which would make him look even more corrupt than he already is. If he denounces terror tactics, does anyone think Hamas and Islamic Jihad will stop suicide bombers? It is obvious that he has no clout with these organizations. He can’t even leave his own compound due to the Israeli tanks and soldiers that have him surrounded. How would he ever be able to solidify a non-terror based coalition between extreme Palestinian elements trapped inside his headquarters in Ramallah? Let’s be realistic. If Chairman Arafat denounces terrorism there is no way Hamas, Islamic Jihad or even Fatah will follow suite. As soon as one of these extremist groups sends another suicide bomber into Israel we all know Arafat will be blamed. This will give Sharon the excuse he needs to press even further and destroy even more Palestinian villages to make way for Israeli settlements. More importantly, this would give Sharon the excuse he needs to assassinate Arafat. Sharon has made it clear that he regrets not assassinating Arafat when he had the chance back in Lebanon during the 1980s. Israeli troops have the Palestinian leader trapped inside his bullet-riddled headquarters as we speak. Yasser Arafat may have terrorist ties, but he is no fool. He may be willing to accept martyrdom, but he is in no hurry. In the eyes of the Arab world, there may be no bigger terrorist than the Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon. No one is asking him to denounce the terror tactics he employed as the commander of IDF Special Unit 101, or as Israeli Minister of Defense. The record he has tallied up as soldier, general, defense Minister and Prime Minister for killing civilians rivals that of any terrorist organization. The double standard is disgusting, but it makes perfect sense when we apply the rhetoric of the “War on Terror” as provided to us by the likes of George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfield, Colon Powell and of course John Ashcroft. By definition, it is impossible for Sharon to be a terrorist. Remember, the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) is backed by the United States and we all know the United States does not support terrorist. Arafat, on the other hand, is probably as hated as Osama Bin Laden. Not only is he an Arab, but they both where those turbans and have scraggly beards. America has already proclaimed to the rest of the world countless times since September 11th that “We shall not sway or cower in our mission” and that “Our cause is just”; yet we continue to blindly support Sharon. Arafat cannot stop the violence alone, especially when the majority of the violence is a direct result of Israeli attacks on innocent Palestinians. Arafat does not have the “Iron Fist” authority we are being led to believe he wields with Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. And even if he did, his reach doesn’t extend past Israeli tanks and soldiers, which are firing on him while he is trapped in his Ramallah headquarters.

Desperation, manipulation, instigation and the Palestinians tragic flaw�

The U.S. is so bent on preserving the state of Israel that we have become blind to the fact that since it’s creation this state has continuously and often horrifically taken land away from Palestinians using methods that vary from State sponsored TERRORISM to cold blooded MURDER all under the clouds of late night bulldozer activity, media blackouts and Anti-Terror rhetoric. We are talking about a country that has openly assassinated Palestinian leaders and justified these actions by proclaiming the victim a terrorist based on evidence they never intend to share with the international community. Despite such actions, the rest of the world has basically proclaimed to the Palestinian people� “We are giving your land away to Israel and we really don’t care about you, what you do or where you go as long as you don’t contest or fight us in our efforts to create and preserve the Jewish state”. Israel is subjecting the Palestinians to near Apartheid conditions. To fight oppression of this magnitude, the Palestinians have unfortunately resulted to loosely organized terror tactics. This is their tragic flaw. Unlike the covert state sponsored terrorism practiced by Israel or even the networking we see in other worldwide terrorist cells, such unorganized suicide terror attacks produce no allies and erase any chance of sympathy, especially during the indefinite “War on Terror” which will cause any potential powerbrokers of diplomacy to stay clear of speaking up on behalf of the Palestinian cause. To make matters even more horrific, Sharon has mastered the art of manipulating and instigating the desperate actions of the Palestinian cause with his adoption of the “War on Terror” rhetoric provided by the Bush Administration. He has learned to simply manipulate horrific circumstances, thus instigating groups such as Fatah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas into desperation terror tactics. Why should these people care if the U.S. wants them to denounce terrorism? The U.S. has made it clear that they will back Israel no matter what the true circumstances may be. Sharon knows this and he knows how to provoke extremist groups into taking the kind of action that the U.S. government and media will frown upon. Then he can simply blame his longtime & hated adversary, Chairman Arafat, whom he has deemed “Irrelevant” for not cracking down on terrorist. Anyone who has access to the even low-level Israeli or U.S. intelligence reports knows that Arafat has absolutely no clout when it comes to stopping the vast majority of these terror attacks. So when a suicide bomber runs into a cafe and blows himself to bits possibly killing a few innocent Israeli civilians, Sharon has learned that he can simply blame Arafat and then send in some tanks and bulldozers to level another Palestinian community and perhaps kill few of them in the process. Then he can start building new Israeli settlements in territory the European Union (EU) and United Nations continues to label as illegally occupied. The U.S. has nothing to say when it comes to such acts of state sponsored terror because we fund the Israeli military. The numbers are clear if we simply examine the death tolls. There are thousands of dead Palestinians and a few hundred dead Israeli’s. When presented with death toll figures the outcry is that we shouldn’t be comparing the numbers. Why? The numbers say it all. Thousands of Palestinians DEAD! Not hundreds, but THOUSANDS! Not all of these murder victims can be terrorist. If thousands of Americans were being killed in any kind of conflict, whether the cause was just or unjust, the whole country would be up in arms ready to go to war. Palestinians are resorting to desperate measures because they see no hope in this conflict. Israeli people should know what is to face humiliation, degradation and death under the rule of an oppressive regime. When a population is desperate, they commit desperate and unreasonable acts in the eyes of 1st world spectators and television audiences. Such acts of desperation are deemed as necessary to achieve freedom. Does anyone actually think that a suicide bomber believes there is any other way to help in liberating his or her people? Suicide is a desperate means of action. People resort to suicide because they are crying out for help!!! People commit suicide because they see no other way and cannot face the conditions that make life so unbearable. These people are killing themselves and others because they see no other way. They are crying out for help because they are being killed needlessly, robbed of their lands and run out of their homes by the IDF. They are crying out in desperation to the rest of the world, in particular the only country that can get the Israeli government to stop. The United States of America. This is desperation. Desperate people commit desperate acts. It is not the same as what Bin Laden teaches his terror squads nor is it the same as the tactics of terror manipulation and instigation as employed by Ariel Sharon. What we should be asking ourselves is who or what would make these people commit such desperate acts? Outside of a few of this countries minority groups, (Native Americans, Blacks, Jews, etc.) people in the United States have no understanding of what it is to act in accordance with human survival instincts, desperation and the belief that there is no hope for you in this LIFE. Islam is not a religion that preaches suicide or terror. It has about as much to do with Islamic religious beliefs, as Priest molesting little kids in Boston has to do with Catholicism. These are desperate people who have been given no reason to believe the rest of the world wants to help them. They are being shot at and killed in refugee camps. Medical supplies and food are not being allowed in. Tanks have them surrounded. They cannot get to their places of employment. Their elected leaders are labeled “irrelevant”. They have no economic power base. They have no oil. Their homes have been bulldozed and replaced with new settlements for Israeli expansion into the West Bank. It reminds me of Native Americans who signed treaties with the U.S. government during the 19th Century to live in peace on reserved lands only to have the U.S. Army come in later with guns and inform them that the conditions of the treaties they agreed to have been altered. The Palestinians are being subjected to cruel and brutal conditions that should be viewed in the same light as the conditions of the Warsaw Ghetto in Poland during nazi occupation. Desperate conditions lead people to respond with desperate measures. Israeli people only have to look back to the late 1930s and early 1940s to see a similar chapter in their own history. With the exception of the United States, the rest of the world has not forgotten. The United Nations sees the clear violations of international law that the IDF continues to commit. That is precisely why they have been asking to allow outside observation of the situation for the entire 18 months of fighting. Palestinians welcome outside observation, yet Israel continues to refuse. Why? I guess the Nazi regime of Germany prior to World War II would have similarly refused international monitoring of their treatment of the European Jew. How could they have forgotten so easily?

Is Israel an Oppressive state?

The United Nations has a World Summit on Racism & Oppression and the most powerful country in the world comes up with excuse after excuse as to why it will not send a delegation. Why? Because human rights activist pushed to include the treatment of Palestinian people under Israeli occupation as a part of the agenda. Palestinians are being oppressed. The whole world sees it, but the United States will not attend a World Summit on Racism & Oppression if this is addressed on an international stage? Why? Our Secretary of State declared that such an addition to the agenda would be “counter-productive”. How the hell would it be counter-productive to include the horrible conditions of life for the Palestinians under the oppressive rule of Israel as a part of the agenda? What kind of message does this send to Palestinians who may very well want to believe a few of the statements made by Bush administration officials. Here is a source of Palestinian desperation. If the United Nations even suggested in 1960 that there should be an international forum to address Worldwide oppression and insisted on including the treatment of Blacks in the Southern states, the U.S. would have pulled out and withdrew support for anything associated with United Nations activity. It’s the same exact thing. Desperation is the result of the most powerful country in the world blaming you when thousands of your people have been killed and hundreds of your villages and communities have been bulldozed. What Sharon & Bush fail to ever emphasize is that not every Palestinian is a terrorist, just like every white person in the South in 1960 was not a racist. Just like every German during World War II was not a Nazi. Israel is an oppressive state and if this is not addressed as a part of a worldwide agenda, we may have another atrocity against humanity on our collective consciousness and the blood of innocent Palestinians and Israelis on our hands.

Intelligent Diplomacy?

Instead of being so determined to support Israel, perhaps U.S. policy makers should reexamine our relationship with Israel. Consider the amount of U.S. taxpayer dollars being GIVEN to Israel every year in the form of free grants or loans that end up being canceled later on. Israel is the only country in the Middle East U.S. policy makers and military strategist feel comfortable with having nuclear capabilities. Why? The most aggressive country in the Middle East and the U.S. is OK with them having nuclear weapons. This has got to be a grotesque double standard to Arab countries in the region. Why is it so important to support Israel? Why? This is the “Double Jeopardy” question. Oil? National Security? Perhaps a fair and unbiased U.S. Middle East policy would help to stabilize and strengthen our relationships with other countries in the region and we would not have to be as concerned about oil or gaining support for overthrowing Saddam. This would be intelligent diplomacy. The creation of Israel was a major destabilizing factor in the Middle East. Why would U.S. policy makers be so stubborn when it comes to the blind and biased support we show for one country if we really wanted stability in this region of the world? So the question arises� Does U.S. policy really place any kind of emphasis on actually bringing any kind of stability to the Middle East? So the U.S. is dedicated to the preservation of Israel� It would appear that the rest of the Arab world could adjust to this. The United States can still be dedicated to the preservation of Israel without being so incredibly biased. We have heard it many times since September 11th� Why does the rest of the world hate us so? Well, Mr. Bush provided the elementary version of the answer to this question in his post September 11th speech. The explicit version has to do with our sometimes clandestine, but often-blatant bias towards one country in this region of the world. A country many Arabs still believe is illegitimate and a country that is oppressing and killing the Palestinian people.

Who is Sharon to throw sticks & stones?

The rhetoric associated with the “War on Terror” has basically given a free hand to Sharon to bulldoze communities, kill anyone who is against the state of Israel, halt the Palestinian way of LIFE and basically ignore the chosen leader of the Palestinian people… Yasser Arafat. If a suicide bomber killed my son or daughter, the pain would be immeasurable and I would hate PALESTINIAN TERRORIST. If my husband was shot and killed while looking out the window of our home before Israeli soldiers BULLDOZED it over in the middle of the night, I WOULD HATE ISRAELI TERRORIST. The fact that one is an organized army backed by U.S. dollars and modern weaponry while the other is a band of desperate and unorganized guerrilla fighters who would give their lives in what their people consider to be an act of martyrdom should make no difference in our efforts to define who is and who is not a terrorist. For Sharon, the Bush administration and U.S. media, it appears to be quite the contrary. One group has modern U.S. weapons while the other group has home made bombs. Both sides kill innocent civilians, but we will refrain from including any of the death toll figures. Both sides are desperate in one way or another to stop the killing of their people. Wow!!! There are a lot of similarities between the two sides but here is the determining factor we must consider in our effort to say who is and who is not a terrorist. The Israeli army and Ariel Sharon get money and weapons from the United States. Well, I guess that says it all. There is absolutely no way Israeli Soldiers and Ariel Sharon could be terrorist. Whether Israeli, Palestinian, American, Christian, Muslim, Jew, Arab, British, or Russian, if you have an opinion or position on this conflict you must realize that both sides must accept responsibility for violence. Both sides are guilty. The spiraling effect of violence does not rest on the shoulders of just the Palestinians. What sickens me is the ridiculous notion that Yasser Arafat has the power to curb the fighting of groups that would never listen him. What is disgusting to me is the blind and unyielding support by the U.S. of Israel despite the illegal nature of the actions they take against the Palestinian people. What nauseates me is the empty rhetoric that does nothing but waste time as more Israeli and Palestinian people die. Even if Yasser Arafat had the power to do anything, the fact that he has been confined by the Sharon Administrations military efforts is something that must be taken into consideration. Anyone who knows the history of this conflict and Sharon’s place in it was frightened by what was to come with his election as Israeli Prime Minister. In the eyes of the Arab world Ariel Sharon is a TERRORIST… PLAIN AND SIMPLE. The United Nations was one Security Council veto away from trying to indict Sharon for crimes against humanity. We only need one guess to come up with the country responsible for stamping a veto on the indictment. As the commander of the Special IDF Unit 101, Sharon employed terror tactics that would make Osama Bin Laden take notice. As the Israeli Defense Minister he engineered countless death campaigns into Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon. Sharon has a reputation as a ruthless former general of the IDF, who has never shown any restraint when it came to civilians being killed or villages being destroyed. No one was surprised when he was quoted as saying he should have killed Arafat in Lebanon when he had the chance. Not that Arafat has a glistening record as a leader or humanitarian, but who is Sharon to throw sticks and stones.

A few common sense questions & thoughts on the “Indefinite War on Terror” before I THROW UP!!!

Why are suicide bombers so much more deplorable than IDF soldiers when more innocent people have been killed by the IDF than by suicide attacks? Why is Israel so vehemently opposed to U.N. or international observers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip? Why is only one side in this dispute (ironically the side with more civilian casualties) being told by Bush and Powell to stop the violence? Why is it considered to be in the best interest of the U.S. to continue to have unyielding support for Israel? Why can’t the brilliant minds responsible for planning and creating U.S. strategy and foreign policy recognize that our biased relationship with Israel is a part of the problem in the Middle East? Why can’t our government be fair when it comes to the ties we have with the countries in this region of the world? It is nothing more than a stubborn display of arrogance that the rest of the world recognizes and continues to grow sick of. This makes absolutely no sense to me, until I consider the power that Jewish special interest groups seem to have on Capitol Hill!! How much power does the network of Jewish lobbying and special interest groups have in Washington? Is it possible that the powerbrokers of Washington fear the Anti-Defamation League and other Israeli Interest groups more than they fear the hate and loathing of so many people around the world for an almost infinite display of hypocrisy when it comes to our Foreign Policy in the Middle East? Have they not considered that terror tactics will only gain support amongst the countries of the world desperate for a chance to live free of the oppression and hypocritical double standards in American foreign policy? Perhaps they have thought of many of these things. Could it be more about the millions of dollars a struggle such as the “War on Terror”, which has “No clear end in sight”, will generate for large corporate entities hungry to take chomps at the largest Defense Department budget increase in 40 years? This is way more important than really making visible strides towards bringing an end to Terror. Perhaps a certain administration realizes what an indefinite “War on Terror” will do for a reelection campaign bid in 2004? Such an indefinite effort to combat terror will provide the Commander-n-Chief with the support he needs as he campaigns for reelection. This will make it hard for any Democrat to challenge George W. Bush, our leader in the just cause of combating terror, in 2004. All this rhetoric associated with the “War on Terror” will almost certainly have a few good campaigning twist and jingles for us to remember in the voting booth. Remember� We are making “clear strides” in breaking up terrorist networks, but there is still “no clear end in sight” so we must continue to support our President no matter what the cost. So let America and Israel stand side by side against terrorist, the Palestinians, Arabs or anybody else that questions us in this indefinite war. Anything else would be clearly unpatriotic. Excuse me�. I think I am going to THROW UP!!!

Mark Williams is a Radio Host, NewsTalk 1530 KFBK, Sacramento, CA.