ARCHIVE ARTICLES
|
- September 15, 2001 - FOR HEAVEN'S
SAKE, AMERICA, SPREAD OUT!
- September 14, 2001 - WOULD
THE CONFEDERACY HAVE BACKED THE UNITED STATES IN THIS
WAR?
- September 14, 2001 - BUREAUCRATS
VERSUS ZEALOTS
- September 14, 2001 - ALL
OUR "ALLIES " LOVE US - -FOR THE MOMENT
- September 13, 2001 - A MAN
WITH A MEMORY LOOKS AT THE "AMERICA FIRST" MOVEMENT
- September 13, 2001 - MY ARAB
SYMPATHIES
- September 12, 2001 - WHAT
MAY HAPPEN
- September 11, 2001 - AMERICA'S
BUREAUCRACIES GET DEADLIER EVERY DAY
- September 11, 2001 - UNTIL
WE FACE THE SIMPLE CAUSE, THE SITUATION WILL GET WORSE
- September 11, 2001 - SUPERTERRORISM
(originally published November 21, 1998)
- September 11, 2001 - LEFTISTS
SHOW US HOW NOT TO DEAL WITH TOMORROW'S TERRORISM
(originally published April 1, 2000)
|
FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE, AMERICA, SPREAD OUT!
|
Those who look at Whitaker Online
once a week will not know that we have been doing
daily updates since the terrorist attacks. These
articles are all below, the latest ones first.
To round off the week I want to return
to the bottom two article here, SUPERTERRORISM,
November 21, 1998, and LEFTISTS
SHOW US HOW NOT TO DEAL WITH TOMORROW'S TERRORISM,
April 1, 2000.
Those were the two reprints our webmaster
Virgil Huston decided to put on in the wake of the
attack. His editorial judgment was right on target
as usual.
Recently I saw two TV discussion shows
talking about whether the World Trade Towers should
be rebuilt. As liberals and good respectable conservatives
always do, each panel ended up with everybody agreeing.
But one group unanimously agreed they should be
rebuilt to spite the terrorists and the other unanimously
agreed that they shouldn't.
Another newscast mentioned that the
stock market will open Monday, but 20% of its communications
were in the World Trade Center. So they said that
this will slow trading JUST AS IT DID AFTER THE
LAST ATTACK ON THE WORLD TRADE CENTER.
A lot of people want us to build those
targets again, so the next attack will hobble our
financial institutions again.
The theme of the two last articles
here has been a WOL theme since the outset:
We now have the means to spread out.
We no longer need to huddle our communications,
our industry, and our population -- in other words,
our terrorist targets -- together in big cities.
But our ruling planners are all in
cities. I am afraid this will not occur to them
until a true "super terrorist" attack finally occurs.
|
|
WOULD
THE CONFEDERACY HAVE BACKED THE UNITED STATES IN THIS
WAR?
|
Yesterday I said that the Confederacy would
have joined the United States "unreservedly" in retaliating
for the New York bombings (A MAN WITH
A MEMORY LOOKS AT THE "AMERICA FIRST" MOVEMENT, below).
A reader disagrees, with considerable heat.
She says the Confederacy would not have backed the American
Empire, which brought this on itself. She may be right.
She is right to be upset if I am wrong, because I have
so little excuse. Whitaker Online warned that if America
continued to ignore history, if it kept trying to straighten
out the Middle East and the Balkans, it was asking for
disaster.
My excuse is that I simply cannot tolerate the idea
of foreigners attacking American soil and getting away
with it. But my own worries about where this may lead,
expressed in September 12's WHAT MAY
HAPPEN (below) and in the two articles that follow
this one, show that my head might disagree with my heart
on this.
|
BUREAUCRATS
VERSUS ZEALOTS
|
We are all rooting for America in this war.
But most of us feel a very deep pessimism about our chances.
I think I have found the reason for that deep dread.
That fear is because, down in our bones, something is
remembering recent history.
Our giant military bureaucracy operates fine against
other military bureaucracies. It conducted a ground campaign
against organized Iraqi forces perfectly. It did mass
bombings perfectly. It did fine in World War II in an
organized campaign against other organized forces.
Our problem now is that we have old established military
and intelligence bureaucracies trying to deal with small,
fanatical groups of terrorists.
These terrorists are operating from the midst of their
own ethnic kin. They are Arab Moslems based in Arab Moslem
country.
This war looks very much like the first war the United
States Government ever lost, the one in Vietnam.
In Vietnam we faced an enemy organized into small groups
operating almost independently. They faded back into the
Vietnamese community and struck when they chose, like
terrorists today.
We tried to fight in Vietnam with our giant military
bureaucracy and we lost. We used mass bombings and body
counts, things that a titanic, centrally organized force
could do. But they controlled the ground by night, as
terrorists do, and in the end our nerve and our national
patience couldn't hold.
If we don't attack the bureaucracy problem, we are in
deep, deep trouble (See September 11, 2001 - AMERICA'S
BUREAUCRACIES GET DEADLIER EVERY DAY and September
11, 2001 - UNTIL WE FACE THE SIMPLE CAUSE,
THE SITUATION WILL GET WORSE).
|
ALL
OUR "ALLIES " LOVE US - -FOR THE MOMENT
|
In Vietnam, our European "allies" -- the
ones declaring their undying love for us right now --
turned against us as soon as the first excitement died
down (See April 14, 2001 - THE "ALLIES" GAMBIT).
Today we are grateful to the Europeans for their sympathy
for American dead in New York and Washington.
We think that sympathy means lasting European support.
We are not remembering the last time we actually staged
reprisals against an Arab country for its support of terrorists.
You have to go back to Reagan's bombing of Libya to find
an example of a military action we took entirely as a
response to terrorist acts. We proved that Libya had sponsored
bombings that took American lives in Western Europe --
on the very soil of our "allies." So Reagan ordered that
country bombed.
Nobody in continental Europe would let our British-based
bombers fly in "allied" air space to attack Libya. They
had to fly west of Portugal over open ocean and it probably
cost American lives.
Europe is a lot like Clinton. When it's just a matter
of sympathy, they feel our pain. But they will cheer us
on as we get in, and they will desert us as soon as the
novelty wears off.
|
A
MAN WITH A MEMORY LOOKS AT THE "AMERICA FIRST" MOVEMENT
|
This is VERY serious business.
It is essential for you to read July 29,
2000 - ANOTHER WRITER IS PROUD TO
HAVE NO FEELING FOR HIS HOMELAND OR HIS PEOPLE and
the following article, MY ARAB SYMPATHIES, before you
comment on this article.
If I were a good Wordist (WORDISM,
May 15, 1999), I would have a lot of sympathy with those
who have attacked America. I have been a good friend to
the Arabs for over forty years, and I have sympathized
with the evil that has been done to them.
But I am NOT a Wordist. I am a nationalist,
and an attack on America is an attack on me, no matter
how many grudges I hold against New York and Washington.
The South is my nation, but America is the
country I am a part of. A Southern Confederacy would be
on the side of the United States without reservation.
Osama Bin Ladin and his like have chosen
to declare war on my land, and that, not his philosophy,
makes him my enemy.
They could have spent all that money and
dedication on telling their side of the story. People
like me would have helped them with all our heart. But
they chose war.
Many are comparing the attacks on the United
States a couple of days ago to Pearl Harbor. Many Americans
back then wanted no part of a European war. Roosevelt
had promised them he would not get us into that war.
Even after Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt tried
to get the US to declare war on Germany and Italy. But
the Congress declared war only on Japan.
Then, on December 11, 1941, Hitler declared
war on US.
So the America Firsters who had previously
resisted getting into the war against Germany SINCERELY
declared their total support for the war against Germany.
These people included William F. Buckley,
SENIOR, a Southerner.
Ever since, liberals and respectable conservatives
have denounced America Firsters as traitors and isolationists
because they did not WANT to go to war against Hitler.
Only those who were for allying us with Stalin before
Pearl Harbor are now considered true patriots.
This insane idea runs this way: Everybody
insists that we fought Hitler, not because he declared
war on our country, but to rid the earth of white people.
Even PAT BUCHANAN once said that!!!! See RESPECTABLE
CONSERVATIVES KILL THEIR WOUNDED, Sept 26, 1999, reprinted
August 11, 2001). So everybody here should have wanted
war from the first.
No, America Firsters did not want to rid
the earth of white people, and if that makes one a traitor,
then count me in.
America Firsters joined in the war with
all their heart because Hitler had declared war on their
country. Maybe Wordists like Buchanan cannot understand
this. But it is the essence of real non-Wordist patriotism
that makes me an enemy of anyone who declares war on my
homeland, no matter what beliefs they profess.
BUT THIS POINT IS CRUCIAL: As you will see
in the next article, I am fully aware of which Arabs are
our enemies and which are not. I would no more advocate
bombing the innocent now than I would have supported bombing
the German-speaking Swiss in 1944.
ANOTHER CRITICAL POINT: TO ME, ISREAL IS
JUST ONE MORE FOREIGN COUNTRY. I see anyone who wants
to shed my nation's blood for some crackpot Bible theory
as blasphemous (See October 21, 2000 - THE
HINDUS IN ROMAN PALESTINE).
To a non-Wordist, American loyalty to Israel
is as treasonous as any other loyalty to a foreign power.
Such foreign loyalty is specifically forbidden in the
oath every naturalized citizen must take, and it goes
for the native born as well.
|
|
When I entered the University of South Carolina
in 1957, the media hated two groups of people to the extent
that they were not considered human. Those two groups
were Southerners and Arabs.
I knew a lot of Palestinian refugees who
had been treated worse by Israel, literally, than American
law would let you treat a dog.
In fact, Arab students led the charge to
get me elected to the Student Senate. You could say I
was the only conservative in history to WIN an election
because of the support of an ethnic minority (See November
28, 1998 - YOU NEVER WIN WITH THE
BLACK VOTE).
I was even considered by some Arabs at USC
to be a spokesman for their side. I have always deeply
appreciated that kind of trust from any group.
In 1959, one my best buddies in Germany
was the German representative of the Arab League.
I have mentioned the Bobby Kennedy episode
(that I alone seem to remember) in Whitaker Online before,
and I will repeat it here:
A Palestinian refugee living in the United
States shot Robert Kennedy. Earlier that same night, as
part of his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination,
Kennedy debated his opponent Eugene McCarthy in California.
The debate was carried on national TV.
As a Southerner and a friend of Palestinian
refugees, I was used to vicious insults and bloodthirsty
threats against those I sympathized with. But what Kennedy
and McCarthy said they planned to do to Arabs that night
froze even MY blood.
Remember that both of these men were PEACENIKS
in Vietnam. But they were also competing for the Jewish
votes and money in the Democratic primary in California.
I have never heard more cold-blooded threats against Arabs
than I heard from those two peaceniks that night!
For this reason, I doubt that that debate
will ever be rerun on television or even reproduced where
it is easy to find.
As I listened, I thought how I wold feel
if I were a Palestinian. Obviously I don't condone murder,
but I understood what had happened to Sirhan Sirhan.
Liberal environmentalists are allowed to
understand the Unibomber without condoning his actions.
But I am not allowed to understand Sirhan Sirhan without
advocating murder, or to side with the America Firsters
without being a traitor.
Nonsense.
For once, George W Bush got it right. The
attack on America was not murder or terrorism, it was
an act of war.
I have been one of those who has understood
and spoken for Arab grievances all my life. I am the last
person on earth to blame all Arabs for these massacres
of Americans. I know the difference, and I know it very
well indeed.
But I am not a Wordist. If you attack America,
you are my enemy, and no one is more of an enemy of those
who have chosen to make war than this old redneck.
|
|
1) Because of the attack on America, the United States
has a chance to really move into the Middle on the side
of Israel.
2) We now have the combination of the Israel
lobby and a state of war.
3) With support from everybody, the US goes
into the Middle East big time.
4) The US, pushed by the Israeli lobby,
fundamentalist "Christians" and Israel-hawk liberals,
goes absolutely nuts in the Middle East.
5) As in Vietnam, our "allies" desert us
sometime next year.
6) The US goes it alone, getting in deeper
and deeper.
7) As the ruin mounts up from loss of oil
and -- less important, the deaths of Americans -- an anti-semitic
reaction grows.
8) In the 1960s, the media and anti-war
advocates became more and more openly pro-Communist. As
our economic collapse grows and real anti-semitism grows
in the US, swastikas begin to go on the streets.
9) People like me begin to scream "naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews,"
because by now it's a real threat. But leftists have screamed
that "wolf" too often in the past.
10 ) a new Holocaust begins
|
AMERICA'S
BUREAUCRACIES GET DEADLIER EVERY DAY
|
The CIA ands FBI failed to give any indication that the
World Trade Center attack was being planned. So Congress
wants to increase the CIA and FBI budgets.
That is our response to everything, and it never works.
More money will not improve bad performance.
American security agencies are run by entrenched bureaucrats.
It is the nature of that bureaucracy that is the problem.
But nobody dares face the problem with our security bureaucracy
because it is the same problem we have with others who
run the country. If we faced it in intelligence, we might
see other things clearly as well.
If we faced the truth about the CIA and the FBI, our
other failing bureaucracies would be in serious trouble.
Instead of pumping more and more money into Government
tuition grants, we might have to realize that our universities
are just entrenched bureaucracies, where academic bureaucrats
hold all the teaching and administrative jobs. No intellectual
need apply.
Our welfare bureaucracy, in fact our entire titanic education-welfare
establishment, would be under attack.
And bureaucrats with stars on their shoulders in the
Pentagon might lose some of their blind conservative worshippers.
Those who run our political bureaucracy might be questioned.
Worst of all, media bureaucrats might even be questioned.
But bureaucrats needn't panic. Nobody is going to let
any of that happen until things get truly desperate.
|
UNTIL
WE FACE THE SIMPLE CAUSE, THE SITUATION WILL GET WORSE
|
When the KGB briefly opened its files right
after the fall of the Soviet Union, those who looked at
them were shocked to discover the enormous extent of Soviet
penetration into the US Government since the 1930s. It
was worse than even McCarthy had thought!
Naturally the liberal media bureaucracy
minimized this news. Respectable conservatives, who are
chosen by the same bureaucracy, hardly mentioned it either.
Nobody spent many resources looking at those
files while they were open. Neither the big media nor
the US intelligence community really wanted to open that
can of worms. So when the KGB closed its files, it was
clear that only a tiny percentage of their American operations
had been uncovered.
For the KGB and other enemy agencies, a
static bureaucracy like that in America's CIA and FBI
is a sitting target. Over a period of seventy years, it
took little talent to penetrate it wherever one wanted
to. They got one Communist sympathizer in, and he got
others in.
Any entrenched bureaucracy will be as riddled
with informers as an unguarded computer is with viruses.
These security failures are easily explained. But it is
an explanation no paid security expert would dare make
public.
So our security bureaucracy is not only
inefficient. It also is open to infiltration.
And please take note: these are only two
of the MANY obvious realities that those who work for
our security bureaucracy must overlook if they want to
keep their jobs.
No security professional, in or out of the
government, is going to point out this obvious fundamental
problem. If he did, he would never get paid to do anything
in that area again.
No bureaucracy, be it security or media
or education or military, is going to fund a serious critic.
This is not a plot. It's just the obvious
result of letting bureaucracy go its own way.
We must stop promoting and listening to
people because they have degrees or years in office or
the right crowd approves of them. That is why they are
allowed, even encouraged, to fail.
Only a complete intellectual revolt against
all entrenched bureaucracies, a root-and-branch house
cleaning, can deal with the real problems America faces.
Make them give us real solutions or get
rid of them. Until we do that, things will get worse.
|
|
There it hangs, the threat of superterrorism.
You can find out how to make a suitcase-size
atomic bomb on the Internet. Russia probably has hundreds
of times as much plutonium missing as is needed. Disease
and poisoning of water supplies are constantly mentioned
as cheaper, less complicated means of superterrorism.
There is no reason liberals or moderates
or respectable conservatives would look at this threat.
The minute superterrorism appears, the entire, narrow
world of liberalism collapses.
As you will see below, the first thing that
will disappear as soon as superterrorism appears will
be the liberal concept of a society planned on rules set
down by social experts.
Liberals don't like to think about superterrorism,
so moderates and respectable conservatives ignore it.
Someone once said that facing execution
concentrates one's attention wonderfully.
Atomic devices will concentrate our attention
wonderfully.
As I mentioned at the Redshirt meeting,
the first atomic terrorist explosion will cause instant
decentralization. Suddenly, when anybody could carry an
atomic device into a community, all this multiracial,
multicultural nonsense will evaporate.
Today, liberalism forces us to make heroes
of anybody who has a grudge against American society or
white people or, in the case of fanatical environmentalism,
even mankind itself.
To the liberals, all the other terrorists
are just right-wing extremists, but the Unibomber was
a semihero. Suddenly, it will no longer be fashionable
to treat guilt-sellers as colleagues. The Unibomber will
be the man of this future, though compared to his nuclear
successors, this leftist radical was a piker. The guy
who got his arms blasted off by the Unibomber got his
attention concentrated abruptly.
He wrote a book about it, and in that book
he no longer shows the usual businessman's tolerance for
environmental radicals.
If political resentment leads people to
use atomic terrorism, and you say you feel America really
belongs to the Indians, I do not want you within a mile
of me.
Literally.
Every liberal and respectable conservative
will declare that superterrorism will be end of civilization.
Not long ago, that might have been the case. But today,
the same thing that makes secession so efficient will
preserve civilization after superterrorism, probably without
too much of a bump. Industry is no longer concentrated
the way it once was. We no longer need the sort of huge
cities that superterrorists can threaten as the center
of our civilization. We can easily spread out and defend
our production facilities.
How will we unite without the United States
Army to force all of us to be part of a single Union?
We will do what we should have done in the
first place. Communities will make voluntary agreements
for trade and mutual protection, as the Confederacy will
make with the United States and other countries. Such
agreements could easily be more efficient than our present
bureaucratic tangle of interstate regulations.
Can civilization survive without the Federal
Courts to regulate every facet of our social life? I believe
so.
|
LEFTISTS
SHOW US HOW NOT TO DEAL WITH TOMORROW'S TERRORISM
|
Technology moves very fast. Those of us
who are older carry around time capsules in our bodies.
Most of us still have some of the old silver fillings
in our mouths. And on our arm, all of us from my generation
have a piece of yesterday -- a smallpox vaccination scar.
Everybody had to have them. As late as the
1970s, you had to prove you had had a fairly recent smallpox
vaccination in order to travel into many countries. Now
the only living smallpox viruses left are in a handful
of laboratories.
Smallpox does not exist outside of a few
laboratories. The World Health Organization has recommended
that even those disease stocks be destroyed. Smallpox
is probably the only disease that human effort has so
far destroyed completely all over the world. But Europe
got rid of leprosy almost as completely centuries ago.
You know all those movies you see where
evil superstitious Europeans are forcing innocent lepers
to live in their own places? This is usually presented
as the old fashioned ignorant approach to such diseases.
But in the real world, it worked. Leprosy
was made to disappear from Europe by isolating it. The
reason WHO says the remaining smallpox virus should be
destroyed is because of its potential use in biological
warfare.
We are facing a large number of threats
of this sort. We are trying to prevent nuclear proliferation,
bacteriological warfare, and other types of mass terrorism.
The only real answer is to take advantage of our advancing
technology to spread the threatened population out. As
I explained on March 6, 1999, in "How
Tomorrow's Confederacy Will Deal With Tomorrow's Reality"
the real solution to this is to use our technology to
SPREAD OUT.
The ruling leftist policy is the exact opposite
of this rational policy. We are told that the solution
to our problem is to force Serbians into living as closely
as possible to Albanians, blacks and whites must be mixed
together in prescribed percentages for racial balance,
and the like.
None of this is necessary for the PROFESSED
liberal aims. Through computer technology and simple travel,
we will in any case have more CULTURAL INTERACTION between
different groups than we have ever had before. We don't
have to be jammed together physically to have cultural
interaction.
Like everything else liberals propose, forcing
groups together won't work. Once again, we must do the
opposite of what liberals propose. In a world where a
single extremist can destroy a city, we will have to spread
out, not integrate.
I have watched liberals for decades, and
this is typical. Every day it becomes more possible for
terrorists to kill everybody in a confined area. The liberal
solution to this is to jam as many potentially hostile
groups as closely together as possible.
Can you imagine that leftists would recommend
anything else?
|
|
Home
| Current Articles | Article Archive | About
Bob Whitaker | Contact Bob | Links
| Privacy
Policy
|
|
|