To Believe in Evolution is to Believe in the Miraculous.

For evolution to work it would require that a male and a female of a species to have developed the same characteristics within the life time of the other.

How many "species" died out waiting for their sex organs or those of the other gender to be present in the right place to permit procreation? And how would nature know that the problem was not that the sex organs were not in right place but the problem was there were no feet.

How many died out waiting for the other gender to develop the eye or nose or feet or paw etc that permitted movement to meet their "mate" with everything in the right place only to find that they were sterile. And how long would it have taken for a second perfect match to develop and procreate?

elief in evolution is belief in the truly miraculous. Wouldn't it be easier to believe a Creator made it?

Letter Sent to Dixie Stampede

It occurred to while I was reading an article in Sunday's The Mountain Press, "Child Molestation trials to start", that, I believe, The Knoxville News Sentinel has reported that the accused Armando Martinez Gonzalez is illegal. That being true and since securing our borders is such a hot topic in the news it might be good for Dixie Stampede to explain your policy on hiring illegals and how extensively you verify the legality of hiring an individual.

The Mountain Press reported Gonzalez will go to trial separately for each charge. That means his case is going to be in the newspaper and on television for many weeks if not for many months and maybe a year or so. Imagine the bad publicity for Dixie Stampede at all locations.

You may recall the following situation 25 years ago.

In 1982, Johnson and Johnson experienced a major crisis when it was discovered
that numerous bottles of its Extra-Strength Tylenol capsules had been laced with
cyanide. By the end of the crisis, seven people had died. How Johnson and
Johnson dealt with this situation set a new precedent for crisis management. The
company was lauded for its quick decisions and sincere
concern for its consumers. Despite initial losses, Johnson and Johnson regained
and exceeded its previous market share within months of the
incident.

Actions of the CEO and other senior management were a
major part of the corporate reaction and eventually to the recovery of
reputation and market share.

Only you and Armando Martinez Gonzalez know what really happened. It has been reported he does not speak English so for Dixie Stampede to put him a situation where he is one on one with your guests is most problematic.

As President Harry S Truman said, "The buck stops here." Where does the buck stop for Dixie Stampede?

Dixie Stampede, and its owners, have a very short window of opportunity to show yourself a community leader or that you are more interested in keeping hourly rates artificially low by hiring criminals.

Religious Beliefs Have No Place In Government

The 1st amendment to the Constitution prohibits congress from “making laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Most of those involved with developing the Constitution believed in God or a higher power of some sort. Most were not “church goers.” Prior to the Declaration of Independence and the Revolutionary War there was financial penalty for those who did not attend the “official” church, that being the Church of England. The Constitution left open the possibility of that being continued thus, in 1791, the 1st Amendment. Thus today people talk of separation of church and state, which is nowhere found in the Constitution.

Religious convictions and beliefs have no place in government. Hopefully a religious person who chooses to indulge in politics brings from their religion, ethics, morality, and honesty nothing more. Sevier County politicians,as well as those in Gatlinburg, Pigeon Forge, and Sevierville might want to take note.

Claiming religious conviction, our President is unwilling to permit the sacrifice of embryos in an attempt to improve the lives of American citizens but is willing to sacrifice the lives of American citizens, some against their will, in an attempt (futile as it is) to improve the lives of people who hate us and hate those being sacrificed and who will, whenever possible, persecute us because of our religious convictions.

If a member of the Muslim religion becomes a person of influence in our government I do not want them applying their religious convictions concerning women or religious conversions or honor killings. I want them to apply laws and the Constitution not the Koran.

Referencing the Saturday, June 16, The Mountain Press Political View cartoon that quotes Mitt Romney as saying "I can't imagine anything more awful than polygamy;" in the drawing the voters are shown to be saying, "Please tell me 'nuclear annihilation at the hands of terrorists' is a close second." My guess is most of us can think of many things much worse than polygamy even though we do not believe it to be right. I do not want a member of the Mormon religion applying their religious convictions concerning marriage. I want them to apply laws and the Constitution, not the book of Mormon, or Pearl of Great Price etc.

Beware of politicians who wear their religion as a badge. A religious person should bring morals, ethics, and honesty to government, nothing more.

Letter Sent to Tennessee Federal Senators and Senate Majority Leader

With all the talk of earmarks and how much they cost the American taxpayer, don’t let the talk discourage you. Someone---Ben Franklin, perhaps---said that democracy will survive only until the people discover they can vote themselves money from the national treasury. We in Tennessee have you.

Will Rogers is alleged to have said “we should elect the local thief and send him to rob Washington.” We in Tennessee have sent you. As you, our government representative, achieve seniority you have more opportunities to give something to us, and we don’t care how you do it, so we elect you again and again and again. The idea of a professional representative was foreign to the men who began this country.

Priorities in public office are: first: take care of ones self; second: take care of the people who provided money; and last, if it does not negatively affect the other two priorities, help the voter.

A definition of a "professional" politician is “one who is more interested in securing their own lifetime career in office through repeated re-election than in fulfilling the duties of their elected office.” As a professional you are more interested in your own re-election, and are willing to subvert the Constitution in order to use the public treasury to buy blocks of votes from the public. “Professional" politicians such as yourself have converted our "republic" into a democracy by surrogates. Where the Founders envisioned statesmen winning elections based on principles, unhampered by term limits and with the entire US treasury at their disposal, "professional" politicians began the wholesale buying of various blocks of voters.

You are a fine example and are proving the rule so keep up the good work….

Citizens Prefer Non-involvement

Recently The Mountain Press reported the results of Gatlinburg’s election of our City Commissioners. One fact was evident to even the most casual observer. The majority of the eligible voters in Gatlinburg prefer a non participatory style of government such as communism, dictatorship, or the like. Apparently at least 74% of the eligible voters prefer Syria’s style of government or maybe Cuba’s style or how about Afghanistan’s?

It is regrettable when citizens show their distain for their city, their country, and our soldiers. The Mountain Press reported that 711 out of a possible 2,705 took time to vote. I do not know the numbers for Sevierville and Pigeon Forge but I suspect Gatlinburg is a fair representative of Sevier County.

Gatlinburg "honoring" soldiers from our city or our county or our state going to Iraq is a joke. Gatlinburg Memorial Day festivities are absurd. Our soldiers are dying so the Iraqi people can vote while Gatlinburg, as a whole, prefers to not get involved and are perfectly happy sending others to die

We should all be embarrassed.

An interviewer asked, "What do you think is the primary cause of the lack of interest in our elections, ignorance or apathy?" The answer given was “I don't know and I don't care."

What do you think?

Disgusting Disney

Below is a letter written to Disney World, in Orlanda FL.

Recently my wife and I, along with our son and his family (2 grandchildren) visited Wilderness Lodge, which was great. Reasonable access to the various parks is a definite plus. We have visited Disney World 6 or 7 times at least since we first brought our son in 1978. While on this visit we visited Epcot and the Magic Kingdom my comment concerns Animal Kingdom.

I hope you are already aware of the situation I will refer to but if you are it is obvious you have taken no steps to correct it and I am disappointed.

For lunch we ate at Flame Tree. While the food was tolerable to good the environment was a disaster. Birds defecating on the tables, chairs and people as well as in their food, children leaving their food to get napkins and birds landing on the tables and grabbing French fries, defecating upon lift off, appear to me to be unacceptable.

I am surprised the Florida Health Department tolerates such environments but I imagine Disney World has a lot of pull in the Orlando area. I believe if you will check with your veterinary staff they will verify that momma birds teach their baby birds how to find food. As years pass along more birds will be feeding at Flame Tree and nesting in the surrounding trees eventually making the area uninhabitable by humans.

I hope you will take the necessary steps to improve the area and that when you have you will let me know. I will not frequent Flame Tree again. Until I receive such notification. The entire experience was nauseating, disgusting, and revolting. Not a good memory of a visit to Disney World, Orlando, FL.

Gatlinburg Natives Protecting Gatlinburg's History? Not!!!

What follows is a letter to the editor of The Mountain Press where I was responding to an article of a group of Gatlinburg citizens were bragging how the natives are protecting Gatlinburg's history.

Reference The Mountain Press February 26, article “All eyes on ‘Burg’ for ’07 jubilee."

The reporter quotes an individual “Gatlinburg is unique to (national park) gateway cities in that the original families are still here and for the most part still in control of the business community.” Another individual is quoted, “The fact that you all built Gatlinburg, not some outsiders, is part of the story … this survey shows that Gatlinburg was built by its founders … .”

Hmmmm, who purchased the Mountain View Inn, from the builder, and replaced that ugly reminder of the past with Fun Mountain and now lets Fun Mountain remain as an eyesore to the community? Could it be one of those descendants of one of those original families? Who continues to let them? Who sold Lucinda Ogle’s cabin to “outside developers?” I believe it was descendants of one of those original families. Who owns the properties that are T-shirt shops? Outsiders? No, those original families that control the business community are at it again. Don't forget the Greystone that is now the Aquarium. Who owns the property surrounding Gatlinburg Inn that is surely destroying the Inn with its noise pollution and all night carousing? Who owns the property crowding the Arrowmont School of Arts making it an island of history in the midst of what? Who owns the property and permits developers to remove the trees that draw the leaf-lookers then builds thousands and thousands and thousands of cabins? If those original families are still in control what business are they controlling it is certainly not an interest in Gatlinburg history.

I'm not sure where these Committee members came from but they see things that are not and think, cabin! I see cabins and wonder just what are they thinking.

In family owned companies it is generally the third generation who either bankrupts the company or takes it public. Gatlinburg is right on schedule.

Do those committee members really want to draw the National Geographic's attention to how Gatlinburg is maintaining its history?

Politicians

I have a philosophy that politicians at all levels are dishonest, unethical and immoral. They will first take care of themselves, second, those who give them money and last and by all means last those who voted for them.

In an effort to achieve what he believes to be a better good a politician may vote for abortions (which he is against) so someone else will vote with him for gun control (which they may be against). They call that politics. I call it immoral, unethical, and dishonest behavior. They are selling a vote and buying a vote. Instead of all the artificial voting our representatives should vote their conscious on all matters and let the chips fall where they may. That way we know the real majority. As it is with all the vote selling and buying the people are not being represented.

Locally a politician may sell his vote for popularity among his peers or he may see maintaining his job as to permit him to support his family the greater good when he sells his vote. These people are not bad people they are just caught in the world of politics. People new to politics get a real slap in the face when they realize that if they are to survive they have to sell and buy votes. Their standards and morals go right out the window. A politician can sell their vote and buy another's vote but for me to pay you money to vote the way I want you to vote is illegal. I see no difference.

Shooting at Virginia Tech

With the shooting at Virginia Tech the arguments for gun control and against gun control. Against and for violent computer games, against and for violence on television, and against and for trash rap will be the 24x7 topic of the cable television networks.

We will hear arguments for and against. As for me, some arguments do not make sense.

As an example, most if not all media rely on advertising as their major source of income. Internet websites depend almost completely on advertisements as their source of income. The Entertainment industry relies heavily on advertising to influence the public to buy their products. That advertising affects the way we think is accepted as fact and is expected by those paying for that advertising. That people change their opinions, actions, behavior, and the way they think as a result of repeated exposure to or as we think of it advertising, is a core belief of all who pay for advertising. If it were not for advertising most would not be able to exist.

On the other hand, these same people tell us that violence on television, violent computer games, portrayal of violence in music, have no affect on us. Are they crazy or are they just lying? The same people who pay for and rely on advertising and the resulting repeated exposure to their commercials to affect our thinking are now telling us what they are paying for and relying on does nothing to affect the public’s behavior?

I suggest the only options are they are lying or they are stupid. What do you think?

Of course repeated exposure to anything does not affect everyone in the same way. If it did, everyone would buy everything they see advertised. But, the people paying for those advertisements are depending on the fact that enough people will be influenced to buy their product they will remain in business. They are counting on their ability to influence the way the public thinks. If repeated exposure to something has no affect there would be no learning and then where would our teachers be?

The public must understand the relationship between what we are exposed to and our resulting behavior. Hopefully we will wake up soon enough to make a difference. Otherwise as shootings at high schools spread shootings at colleges will repeat. How many have to die before the public becomes aware of the obvious and works for and demands change?

Are the religious beliefs of people in public office relevant?

Recently General Pace had the adacity to tell us what he believed is moral and what is immoral. Are the beliefs of people like General Pace relevant? "No." I want honesty, integrity, and ethical behavior. I want our leaders to work hard and to care. Their religious beliefs are of no consequence. If we have a Muslim Supreme Court appointment I do not want them applying their religious beliefs concerning women I want them to apply the constitution. If a homosexual is appointed I do not want them to apply their belief on marriage I want them to obey the law. A General who does not like homosexual activity has no right to allow those beliefs to affect his daily duty as General. What he believes to be moral or immoral is of no consequence. He should keep quiet...

What Does Taking the Fifth Amendment Mean?

The Fifth Amendment includes the phrase: “(No Person) shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,”

To understand, we must remember that the Constitution specifies what the Federal Government may or may not do not what individuals may or may not do. Limitations on citizens are called “Laws.”

The Federal Government may not consider the individual guilty or punish the individual when the individual claims the Fifth Amendment. Citizens may. There is nothing to prohibit citizens from believing an individual guilty of a criminal act and acting accordingly toward that individual when that individual claims the Fifth Amendment. After all they are admitting that if they testify they will be a witness against himself in a criminal case, just as the Constitution says.

Today it seems the Fifth Amendment is used whenever an individual does not want to testify; when testifying might cause embarrassment; when testifying might make public some information the individual does not want made public. What follows is Amendment V (1791) in its entirety.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be take for public use, without just compensation.

Mercenaries Patrolling Our Cities

The citizens of the United States should be aware that their federal government is using mercenary forces such as Blackwater, DynCorp, Intercon, American Security Group, Blackhawk, Wackenhut and an Israeli company called Instinctive Shooting International to police our cities such as New Orleans following Katrina.

The Federal government is ignoring Posse Comitatus (the ban on using US troops in domestic law enforcement). The presence of heavily armed private forces in New Orleans only demonstrates what everyone already feared: the utter breakdown of the government. To have them now on the streets of New Orleans is frightening, possibly illegal and definitely unconstitutional.

The Myth of Freedom of Speech

Recently our local news paper dropped Ann Coulter's column. It was their response to her statement about having to go to rehab if she used the term "faggot." As would be expected, the moronic cry of Censorship! was heard far and wide. Obviously these people do not understand the Constitution. Following is a letter-to-the-editor of the newspaper.

At the time of adopting the Constitution several states wanted additional restrictive clauses to prevent the Federal government from abusing its powers. Thus, beginning in 1791, we have Amendments to the Constitution with Amendments 1 through 10 AKA Bill of Rights.

The First Amendment, we hear quoted so frequently reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

The Constitution of the United States sets limits on what the Federal government may or may not do. It says nothing about what individuals may or may not do. Those limitations are called Laws. Because of our ignorance of the Constitution “We the people,” have permitted the Judiciary Branch to make new laws and add invisible amendments to the Constitution.

While the Federal Government may not “abridge the freedom of speech,” private individuals and corporations do not have that same limitation. I, as an individual, am not required to listen to you and you have no Constitutional Right that requires me to listen to you. The Mountain Press is not required to print anything the owners do not want printed and may print anything the owners want printed. That is not censorship that is freedom of speech, The owners of The Mountain Press' freedom of speech.

I encourage the Readers of The Mountain Press to read the Constitution and know what it says as well as what it does not say and to stay in touch with our governments.

Another 'F' word

In response to Ann Coulter's latest comments about having to go to rehab if she talks about faggots our local paper decided to replace her as one of their commentators,.

Generally I agree with her comments but mostly I like that she is a burr under the Liberal's saddle. She is usually over the top and over reactive but it is fun to listen to her and her opponents play verbal tag. On one occasion Larry King of CNN tried everything he could to get her to contradict herself but she did not. That was interesting to watch.

Most of the time she thinks fast but not in this case. She succumbed to the same temptation everyone in a position of influence eventually succombs to and that is they begin to think they can do or say anything. She was in a safe environment and whether planned or by accident she overstepped her boundaries. She tried to be humorous at another's expense and now defends what she said by trying to change the accepted meaning of the term. What is the meaning of "is?"

I wonder if the paper would have had the same reaction if she had said homosexual, or gay or even queer. And I wonder if everyone's upsettedness comes from the idea the word she used is a term of contempt or that she was alluding to John Edwards being a closet homosexual, which I do not have any reason to believe that he is. If it is at all because she may have been accusing him of not being straight it should tell the world homosexual activity is not accepted no matter what the law claims and to allude to someone being one is a no-no and a major insult. If she had made a similar statement about a homosexual being straight most likely nothing would have been said. Based on the public reaction to a commercial during the Super Bowl the majority of Americans find homosexuality disgusting, revolting, dirty and something to disdain and they can think it but not say it in a public forum such as the one Ms Coulter found herself in.

Now we have one "N" word and 2 "F" words that will cause someone to have a hissy-fit. I wonder what is next.

I await our paper's decision on her replacement. But I suggest they do not hold out hope the next one won't do or say something stupid also,

Gatlinburg Maintaining Its History?

Recently there was an article in our local newspaper concerning National Geographic coming to town, “All eyes on ‘Burg’ for ’07 jubilee."

The reporter quotes an individual “Gatlinburg is unique to (national park) gateway cities in that the original families are still here and for the most part still in control of the business community.” Another individual is quoted, “The fact that you all built Gatlinburg, not some outsiders, is part of the story … this survey shows that Gatlinburg was built by its founders … .”

Hmmmm, who purchased the Mountain View Inn, from the builder, and replaced that ugly reminder of the past with Fun Mountain and now lets Fun Mountain remain as an eyesore to the community? Could it be one of those descendants of one of those original families? Who continues to let them? Who sold Lucinda Ogle’s cabin to “outside developers?” I believe it was descendants of one of those original families. Who owns the properties that are T-shirt shops? Outsiders? No, those original families that control the business community are at it again. Don't forget the Greystone that is now the Aquarium. Who owns the property surrounding Gatlinburg Inn that is surely destroying the Inn with its noise pollution and all night carousing? Who owns the property crowding the Arrowmont School of Arts making it an island of history in the midst of what? Who owns the property and permits developers to remove the trees that draw the leaf-lookers then builds thousands and thousands and thousands of cabins? If those original families are still in control what business are they controlling it is certainly not an interest in Gatlinburg history.

I'm not sure where these Committee members came from but they see things that are not and think, cabin! I see cabins and wonder just what are they thinking.

In family owned companies it is generally the third generation who either bankrupts the company or takes it public. Gatlinburg is right on schedule.

Do those committee members really want to draw the National Geographic's attention to how Gatlinburg is maintaining its history?

Global Warming Debate Heats Up

The cause or causes of Global Warming may be debated but it is obvious to the even the most oblivious is that things have changed and are continuing to change.

Photographs of the Teton mountain range show there is less year-around snow in the mountains today than there was just twenty years ago.

Cruises now cross the Arctic area later into the season because the ice flows are smaller and do not extend as far as they have in the past. If you want to see something funny is to see a boat arrive in a town with 200 to 300 people and ask where the dock is located. There is no dock. The town does not have enough food and supplies to take them through the winter let alone sell some to a group of tourists. Tourists can be a bit testy when they don't get what they want.

The icy habitat of the polar bear is disappearing causing the continued existence of the polar bear in question. Polar bears spend most of their lives on floating ice in the sea. But that ice is melting, and polar bears have nowhere else to go. Bears do most of their hunting from ice close to, or attached to, the shoreline. There has been ice near the land for hundreds of years. Today, in one of the polar bear habitats in Canada the ice is melting four weeks earlier than it did twenty years ago and in places can be 200 miles from shore in the summer. Scientists say there has been more ice melt than normal in the last fifteen years. In the last six years, the melting has speeded up even more. At the present rate scientists estimate there will be no ice left in the Arctic within thirty-five years allowing for more cruises even later into the winter season. Polar bears can completely disappear by the end of this century.

There are many other examples so those who consider the concept a hoax should wake up and smell the roses. The question is, is the warming part of a cyclical warming and cooling thus being completely natural OR are the billions and billions of barrels of oil having a negative affect on the environment?

God said he would not destroy the earth until the end when it will burn away but He never said He would not permit his Creation to destroy itself.

Where're the Media and the Scholars

I am wondering why I do not hear more outcry from our scholars as well as our media concerning the military of the United States being committed to battles lacking a congressional Declaration of War upon the focus of our wrath? I hear no comments concerning our invading of a sovereign country; removing their army and police forces; removing the legal government; imprisoning the administration; turning their President over to his political enemies; and then watching while he was executed in a manner not tolerated within the United States. We are not the world’s police and have no legal right to do what we did in Iraq or any other country no matter how despotic their leaders.

With almost the entire world being against us George has more to worry about than Iraq. He as well as other "leaders" could very well be the focus of a War Crimes Trial. They may never be taken into custody but I suggest we should look for the Middle East countries to ask the World Court for such a judgment and for that request to be granted. Then things should really get interesting.

By not understanding the religious mind of the area we have created a monster from which we may never honorably extricate ourselves. They are not crazy and they have an agenda. They could kill our president, poison our waters, kill anyone anytime. We have finally run up against an enemy who wants us out of their countries and their hemisphere. Not unlike our not wanting them in our country or in our hemisphere.

Where're the Media and our Constitutional Scholars when you need them?

Is NASCAR Serious?

News reports would cause one to believe the NASCAR cheaters are kids who got caught with their hand in the cookie jar and that boys will be boys.

Intentional cheating should result in the entire team being disqualified for the next race plus point reduction plus a dollar fine plus a substantial fine to the owner of the car. How about limiting the number of sponsors names on the car that cheated? How about a no decals for the race?

If NASCAR is serious they should get serious. A second violation of intentional cheating should result in disqualification for the entire season.

Ethics are ethics there are no business ethics, no racing ethics there are ethics.

If the fans cannot believe the results of a race it is professional wrestling.

On the other hand how about two races each season with no control over the car setup?

Pigeon Forge City Commissioners Vote for Industrial Zone

Recently our local paper had an article with a headline “PF city Commissioners vote for industrial zone” with a secondary headline, “Rezoning of property would open field for adult businesses, any type of industry.”

The reporter quotes one of the local commissioners as saying, “This is not putting a rubber stamp on adult businesses, this opens up that land for any type of business.” If it is not a rubber stamp what is it?

Unless the cost of locating in such a district is prohibitive the commissioners have just created a future slum where illegal activity of all sorts will migrate. If you doubt it look at any city with a district specifically zoned for “adult businesses and industry.” Most cities would like to eliminate such districts while Pigeon Forge is creating one.

People in large cities migrate away from such districts. Has anyone studied the likely affect such a district will have on the home owners across the street or are they not within Pigeon Forge so no on cares what the affect might be? Are we to look forward to smoke stacks belching out air pollution of all sorts? Will more police activity be required? If so has anyone looked into how that will affect that department?

If the concerns I mention are not relevant someone might want to clarify what is going on because at first blush it looks horrible.

At least we know where the casinos and the associated one-armed bandits will be located when they are eventually approved by our state legislature. If you doubt they are coming remember the lottery. How many years back did anyone believe Tennessee would have a Lottery?

Iraq a Major Miscalculation

Every “war” the United States has participated in since WWII has been political as well as unconstitutional. Our Presidents have committed our military without Congress declaring war as specified in the Constitution. If the President would have asked for a Declaration of War those “wars” would have been countrywide wars instead each was Republican or Democratic war. A non-binding resolution of support by our congress is nowhere to be found in our Constitution. Luckily we were able to get out of each of those debacles until Iraq. Except for those unfortunate enough to have died or been maimed for life.

We cannot win in Iraq for many reasons among them is the moral of the military, for which we are the blame. One of the soldiers upon his return said no one wants to be the last one to die for a mistake. You cannot win if you are not willing to die. Until we are ready to kill hundreds just to kill one we cannot win. As General Giap of North Viet Nam, until we are willing to lose ten of ours to kill one of theirs we cannot win. Military leaders such as Tommy Franks should have been run out of the service instead of being allowed to retire. He conspired with Rumsfeld to develop a battle plan that was a joke. The enemy should never be allowed to be in strength at your back. We send convoys on roads not secured and wonder why our people our killed. Franks put his men and women into a trap and then he left. He is an embarrassment to the history of great leaders in our history.

We accomplished what we wanted to accomplish when we destroyed the government in Afghanistan, a country giving refuge to those who attacked us, and installed a puppet President who previously resided within our borders.

We have accomplished what we wanted to accomplish in Iraq. We invaded a sovereign country; disbanded their army and police forces; removed the legal government; imprisoned the administration; turned their President over to his political enemies; and then watched while he was executed in a manner not tolerated within the United States. We are not the world’s police and have no legal right to do what we did in Iraq or any other country no matter how despotic their leaders.

Iraq never was a threat to the United States anymore than any other country in the Middle East as well as South America as well as the Far East. We picked on the one we thought we could beat and made a major error in judgment.

During our Revolutionary War we proved a small band of untrained badly organized group of patriots with the sometimes assistance of our enemies’ enemy could defeat the greatest army in the world. Similar to what is happening in Iraq.

With almost the entire world being against us George has more to worry about than Iraq. He could very well be the focus of a War Crimes Trial. He may not be taken into custody but look for the Middle East countries to ask the World Court for such a judgment and for that request to be granted. Then things should really get interesting.

By not understanding the religious mind of the area we have created a monster from which we may never extricate ourselves. They are not crazy and they have an agenda. They could kill our president, poison our waters, kill anyone anytime. But they do not. We have finally run up against an enemy who wants us out of their countries and hemisphere. Not unlike our not wanting them in our country or in our hemisphere.

We are on our own. We can no longer count on God’s help since we have expelled him. We just might be the Northern Tribes being carried off by the Assyrians.

The last “war” we won was a war where civilian leaders did not mini manage the military. Until our military is allowed to do what they believe right we cannot win. With a country such as we are today the outcome of WWII might well have been quite different than it was and we just might be speaking German today. A country without morals is a country without laws and is no use to anyone.