|
Think What He Would Be Doing Now?
Republicans should be thankful for the restraint that the President has shown during the initial stages of this national crisis.
Just think what response Clinton would have crafted. Thank God he is but a bad memory of the past. But we need not celebrate
too soon, because there are others waiting in the wings to push the same belligerent response if they were the voice of policy.
Balance in reporting has never been the hallmark of the press or the talking heads. Consider the criticism that Robert
Novak has received when he ended his column, 'This is no pearl harbor' with this conclusion: "The big winner today, intentionally
or not, is the state of Israel." Neoconservatives have crawled out of their shell, when the possibility that an equilibrium
in the Mideast could be considered. When Novak implies that any Bush efforts or intentions for improving relations with the
Muslim world, are dampened with the terrorist massacre; he is right. So why is he taking the heat for saying what we all know
to be true?
Could it be that both the press and the policy makers at the State Department want a war? Do they know
that an organized coalition against radical Islamic fundamentalists will reinforce support for Sharon and Israel? Just maybe,
Bob is hinting at an underlying benefit for those who control foreign policy.
When the media taps and anoints their
candidate, we all know that he or she must have that approved agenda that only serves a hidden master. Might this help explain
all the negative reporting during the last campaign towards George II? Maybe, just maybe, this also reveals the reason behind
all that favorable coverage for Senator John McCain.
Remember it was McCain who urged columnist Pat Buchanan to leave
the party, while Bush declined to join in with the Senator, during the South Carolina primary. McCain was elevated to sainthood
after this crucial primary. He went from being the darling of the liberal press to their new savior.
James D. Besser
reports in the Jewish Journal, that South Carolina "will haunt the Bush campaign and the Republican party as it tries
to win Jewish votes in November". Marshall Wittman, an official with the Heritage Foundation and a top McCain supporter,
comments: "They allied themselves with the hard right, and that will have an impact on Jewish voters." He goes on
to say: "Anecdotally, at least, it appeared McCain was attracting many Jewish Democrats who were considering voting for
a Republican for the first time."
Could this conscious effort of McCain, to align himself with a traditional
Democratic special interest voting block be the 'Manchurian Candidate', representing the interests of his real convictions?
It has long been reported the ubiquitous characteristics that lends itself to concluding that McCain is a 'Trojan Horse'
for the conservative cause. McCain's rejection of the 'land for peace' formula is best understood in his own words before
the Republican Jewish Coalition. He said:
"It is not land exchanges that guarantee a lasting peace, but the character of the regimes that enter into such agreements.
Despotic, corrupt and militant regimes do not make good peace partners.... I will never ask Israel...to sacrifice tangible
land in exchange for intangible promises. And I will never ask them to finalize any peace accord until all the provisions
of Oslo and subsequent agreements have been met. For too long, the nation of Israel has bargained in good faith, but received
little in return."
He said he would force "the peace partners" to live up to their agreements under the accords before any new transfers
of land took place.
After his speech, Mr. McCain stated that he would move the American Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem
from Tel Aviv on his first day in office.
Contrast this statement with that of President Bush during his first meeting
with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Bush said:
"I told him that our nation will not try to force peace," Bush said. "That we will facilitate peace and that
we will work with those responsible for peace."
Where would our country be if the 'closet liberal' media darling, McCain had defeated Bush in the primaries? During these
times of uncertainty, we can be sure that a McCain/Gore choice would have thrust upon our Nation an automatic response of
cruise missiles and carpet bombing. Isn't that exactly what the media elite's wanted to ensure?
McCain is no Republican.
He is certainly not in the conservative tradition of prudent balance in foreign policy. He a 'tool' of the forces that seek
to expand an Empire of the Corporate/State. The entire Arab world needs to bring the 'rogue criminals' to Justice. If the
U.S. adopts and enforces the kind of policies that the McCain's of the world promote, we will be engulfed in a final conflict
that will bring a 'Blowback' of tragic proportions to our land.
Jeffords left the party, isn't it about time that
John McCain follows? When Republicans drive out Pat Buchanan, and isolate and ignore Alan Keyes; it merges the Grand Old Party
into the camp of the Warmongers. Saladin defeated the Crusaders, but was recognized by the Christians for a reputation of
generosity and chivalry, in their defeat. Richard the 'Lion Heart' was admired by Saladin as a worthy opponent. McCain deserves
the respect of neither. His crusade champions a cause that is NOT ours. Until we recognize this reality and act in our own
National interest, we will suffer the fallout, both figuratively and quite possibly literally; of the John McCains' a wolf,
in the cloth of Republican garb.
SARTRE - September 25, 2001
|
|
| Bomber McCain - At Your Service |
CNSNews.com material, copyright 1998-2001
|
