Question:
Why conservatives always bring up the treason card?
anonymous
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Why conservatives always bring up the treason card?
29 answers:
acid0philus
2007-03-29 20:47:57 UTC
Both sides have their stupid little "cards" that they play. It's all gotten old and rather annoying to watch. This coming from someone who has stopped playing either side's game. It's all obfuscation. A bit reminiscent of the scene in "The Best Little Whorehouse In Texas", where the politician explains his game to the sheriff with his little song and dance... Literally.



Funny! Vote me a poor answer to shut me up! How funny and simultaneously pathetic! Seems to me someone thinks their party is right, no matter what, and those who are brave enough to call both sides for their crap are viewed as the enemy. I don't need your pathetic political good old folks clubs to be an American or a patriot.
archangel72901
2007-03-29 20:48:12 UTC
I think we have the race card also. We freed the slaves you (the dems) opposed it. We don't feel the need to ask if america is ready for a _________ president. Because it doesn't occur to us to question someone's merit on the basis of their color or sex.



Just like the myth that liberals are tolerant.
anonymous
2007-03-29 20:43:55 UTC
You my friend are obviously confused. I'm also confused by this statement. " As soon as you start criticizing Bush or Republicans". Who are you talking about?



Lesson of the day - A confusing question can only be asked by a confused individual.
bamafannfl
2007-03-29 20:47:07 UTC
You got your two cards and we have ours.



You libs throw the race and homophobia cards at us so we throw the treason and Anti-America cards at you.



Although it would be hard for you libs to prove your cards are justified in using on us, but we have proof of our cards being justified for you. Read the Venona Project Files. The liberals and Hollywood were "BUSTED".
boonietech
2007-03-29 20:53:02 UTC
I don't see any denial up there.



Aiding and abetting. providing comfort. disseminating enemy propaganda. Hindering and interfering with troop missions.



Liberal treason if you ask me.



BTW, wonder what the left's hero FDR would have done to today's media?
Buffy Summers
2007-03-29 20:49:54 UTC
It's a logic fallacy used in propaganda called "false equality," meaning to say or imply that two things are equal when they are not related. It works with two other propaganda techniques like the double bind and the false analysis of history. Propaganda is opinion dressed up in slander, and it differs substantially from political debate. Unfortunately it is rampant (along with name calling and baiting) from boths sides of the political spectrum.
Pop D
2007-03-29 20:45:35 UTC
Because they can't handle a true democracy. Dissent to them is not a freedom. They believe only obedience to the conservative right is permissible in their society. They would be much more comfortable in a dictatorship such as China or Korea.
anonymous
2007-03-29 20:44:48 UTC
most of the time treason is a stretch, but if you say or do things that show our enemies that we hate our own troops, are waiting for our country to fail to make an administration look bad, that gives them comfort and aid, and that is treason.
anonymous
2007-03-29 20:45:37 UTC
Like divulging the name of CIA Agents in time of war isn't TREASON.

Like 145,000 violtaions of the "Patriot Act" aren't Treason

The Election Fraud that brought about the Firing of the US Attorneys are just felonies.

But halliburton getting no bid contracts while doing work in Iran has to be something akin to TREASON
Beardog
2007-03-29 13:44:06 UTC
When you can't win an argument because of a flawed position, the next best thing is discrediting your opponent.
persiandiva77
2007-03-29 20:41:12 UTC
Liberals have the race card AND the "Bush LIED" card. Is this country ever gonna come together?
rz1971
2007-03-29 20:45:28 UTC
Because it sounds better to them then admitting that the other side just might be correct. And I'm talking about BOTH sides. they are both wrong and right and can no longer work together.

Fire everyone in government and elect new officals with no politcal background and maybe we might get something done.
Andrew S
2007-03-29 20:44:19 UTC
if you havent noticed, a lot of mainstream media does have a liberal bias, and they'll do anything for a story that'll hurt the president. if it hurts the country's interests at the same time, they dont mind.
georgewallace78
2007-03-29 21:18:27 UTC
I wonder why liberals want the military to look bad....



talk about your traders



gw
Perplexed
2007-03-29 20:40:41 UTC
Again they are not capable of independent thought. They hear this kind of treasonous talk on some ridiculous program and they all go around parroting it like it actually makes sense.
MoltarRocks
2007-03-29 20:41:12 UTC
Always? I've never used the term 'treason'.



Quit generalizing.
coragryph
2007-03-29 20:40:11 UTC
Because it's the simplest way to attack the speaker. They get to avoid every having to acknowledge or address the original issue.



Chant "treason" and suddenly the conversation changes.
PROUD TO BE A LIBERAL TEEN!
2007-03-29 20:40:26 UTC
Propaganda is enemy within. Both liberals and Conservatives are brainwashed by propaganda.
yupchagee
2007-03-29 20:42:04 UTC
Not always. Only when hatred of America is obvious & irrational.
brian2412
2007-03-29 20:40:35 UTC
It seems to be in their nature to intimidate or slander anyone who disagrees with them. They just can't seem to handle disagreement very well.
Da Man
2007-03-29 20:41:04 UTC
https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20070327133459AA9R2np

question about Conservatives crying treason resolved
truth seeker
2007-03-29 20:40:08 UTC
They get it from Hannity and Limbaugh who repeat it ad nauseum.....
wolf
2007-03-29 20:40:10 UTC
The terrorists support you all the way.

They hate America, too.
anonymous
2007-03-29 20:41:08 UTC
Cause it's true.
anonymous
2007-03-29 20:41:08 UTC
is this fools poker?
EZMZ
2007-03-29 20:44:21 UTC
the treason card?----interesting issue------wish we could bring back the firing squad for treasoners----thats true justice.





THE WAR



Please take the time to read the essay below by Dr. Chong. It is without a doubt the most





This WAR is for REAL!

Dr. Vernon Chong, Major General, USAF, Retired

Tuesday, July 12, 2005.



To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country is now facing the most

serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine

(which includes WWII).



The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who

think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means.



First, let's examine a few basics:



1. When did the threat to us start?

Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer as far as the United States is concerned is

1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us:



* Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979;

* Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983;

* Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983;

* Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988;

* First New York World Trade Center attack 1993;

* Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996;

* Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998;

* Dares Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998;

* Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000;

* New York World Trade Center 2001;

* Pentagon 2001.



(Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide).



2. Why were we attacked?

Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the

administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault

either the Republicans or Democrats as there were no provocations by any of the presidents

or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.



3. Who were the attackers?

In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.



4. What is the Muslim population of the World? 25%.



5. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?

Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the predominately Christian

population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was

also Christian), that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or

you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political

reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests). (see http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm...



Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the six million

holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the

Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy

about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world

- German, Christian or any others.



Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way --

their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone else. The point here is that just like the

peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many

peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim

leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing -- by their own pronouncements --

killing all of us "infidels." I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the

choice was shut up or die?



6. So who are we at war with?

There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists.

Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There

is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting. So with

that background, now to the two major questions:



1. Can we lose this war?



2. What does losing really mean?



If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions. We can definitely lose

this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many

of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second question - What does losing mean?



It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads,

bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like post Vietnam. This is as far

from the truth as one can get.



What losing really means is:



We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but

rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just

wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us,

over the past 18 years. The plan was clearly, for terrorists to attack us, until we were

neutered and submissive to them.



We would of course have no future support from other nations, for fear of reprisals and for

the reason that they would see, we are impotent and cannot help them.



They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier

for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong

for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed

their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do will be

done. Spain is finished.



The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they might see the light and

realize that if we don't win, they are finished too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists

without us. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and

fading fast!



If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will all vanish as we know

it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us, if they were threatened by the Muslims. If we

can't stop the Muslims, how could anyone else?



The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war, and therefore are completely committed

to winning, at any cost. We better know it too and be likewise committed to winning at any cost.



Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. Until we recognize the

costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning.

And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.



So, how can we lose the war?



Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by "imploding." That is, defeating ourselves

by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose, and really digging in and lending full

support to the war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to

be divided, there is no way that we can win!



Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life and death

seriousness of this situation.



President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Although all of the

terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary

Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously?

This is war! For the duration, we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we

have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights

temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.



And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII,

and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then.



Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him?



No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness, and

all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of

those words apply to war. Get them out of your head.



Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the Administration that it almost

seems they would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they

are disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless,

that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening. It

concerns our friends, and it does great damage to our cause.



Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media regarding the

treatment of some prisoners of war, perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We

have recently had an issue, involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war,

by a small group of our military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few

months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands,

cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just for disagreeing

with Saddam Hussein.



And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own

people for the same reason. They are also the same type of enemy fighters, who recently

were burning Americans, and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq.



And still more recently, the same type of enemy that was and is providing videos to all

news sources internationally, of the beheading of American prisoners they held.



Compare this with some of our press and politicians, who for several days have thought

and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners -- not

burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading

them, but "humiliating" them.

Can this be for real?



The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the Secretary of Defense.

If this doesn't show the complete lack of comprehension and understanding of the

seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we are in and the

disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can.



To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look

like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned -- totally oblivious to what is going on in the

real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again I say,

this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply

means that they are absolutely oblivious to the magnitude of the situation we are in, and

into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us, for many years.



Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels! That translates into ALL

non-Muslims -- not just in the United States, but throughout the world.



We are the last bastion of defense. We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.'

That charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so

good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us,

and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world!



We can't!



If we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive, and no other free country

in the world will survive if we are defeated.



And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech,

freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equal rights for anyone --

let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in

one single way that contributes to the good of the world.



This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated

in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of the Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders

will allow history books to be written or read.



If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in

the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and

continue to encroach little by little, on the established French traditions. The French will be

fighting among themselves, over what should or should not be done, which will continue to

weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?



Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force.

Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece.



And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide that they

abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power.

They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing

each other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing

from the politically correct, about the "peaceful Muslims"?



I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are united, there is no way

that we can lose. I hope the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation

we are in, and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about!

Do whatever you can to preserve it.



After reading the above, we all must do this not only for ourselves, but our children, our

grandchildren, our country and the world.



Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal and that includes the Politicians

and media of our country and the free world!
kapute2
2007-03-29 20:39:22 UTC
because you're a traitor
anonymous
2007-03-29 22:54:25 UTC
This is Fiction; or is it?

_____________________



The following Highly Probably More Fact Than Fiction Scenario was written by Raymond S. Kraft



WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS?



Consider the Predictable Consequences Now that Democrats Are In Power.



December 7, 2008, began inauspiciously. At 0753 at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, the attack that had triggered America's entry into World War II, sixty-seven years before, was ceremoniously commemorated, an honor guard, taps, a 21-gun salute, the bugle's notes and the rifles' crack drifting across the bay to the USS Arizona memorial, where Admiral Arthur Peterson, USN Ret., laid a wreath in memory of the sailors sleeping below --one of whom was his own grandfather.



On the West coast it was 1053, and in Washington D.C. it was one fifty-three in the afternoon, 1353 military time.



In 2006 America, tired of War in Iraq, had elected Democrats to modest majorities in both houses of Congress. Representative Nancy Pelosi became Speaker of the House, third in line for the presidency.



In the spring of 2007, on a narrow, party-line vote, Congress, led by Senators John Kerry and Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer refused to authorize spending to continue the war in Iraq, and set September 30, 2007, as the deadline for complete withdrawal of American troops.



President Bush spoke to the country, to the American forces in Iraq, to those who had been there, and to the Iraqi people, to apologize for the short-sightedness and irresponsibility of the American congress and the tragedy he believed would follow after leaving task of nurturing a representative and stable government in Iraq half done, his voice choked, tears running down his stoic face, a betrayal of emotion for which he was resoundingly criticized and denounced in much of America's media.



The level of violence across Iraq immediately subsided, as the Americans began preparations to redeploy back to the States. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad praised the new Congress for its clear vision and sound judgment.



America's Democrats rejoiced and congratulated themselves for bringing peace with honor and ending the illegal war based on lies that George Bush had begun only to enrich his friends in the military-industrial complex, and promised to retake the Presidency in 2008.



"The failure of many Americans, including many of the leading Democrats in Congress, and some Republicans, to fully appreciate the persistent, long-term threat posed to America's liberties and survival, and to the future of Liberal Democracies everywhere, by an Islamic Resistance Movement that envisions a world dominated and defined by an Islamic Caliphate of religious totalitarianism, and which will fight any war, make any sacrifice, suffer any hardship, and pay any price to achieve it, may prove to be the kind of blunder upon which the fate of America turns, and falls."



At 1000 on September 30, 2007, precisely on schedule, the last C-5A Galaxy carrying the last company of American combat troops in Iraq had roared down the Baghdad runway and lifted into the air. Only a few hundred American technical and military advisers and political liaisons remained in-country.



The Galaxy's wheels had scarcely retracted when Iraq erupted in the real civil war many had feared and foreseen, and which many others had predicted would not happen if only the American imperialists left Iraq. Sunni militias, Shia militias, and Al Qaeda militias ravaged and savaged the country, killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis known or suspected to have collaborated with the Americans, killing Shias for being Shias, Sunnis for being Sunnis, Americans for being Americans, and anyone else who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.



By noon, not one of the American advisers and liaisons left behind remained alive. Many had been beheaded as they screamed. Most of their bodies were dumped in the river and never seen again.



In the next thirty days more than a million Iraqis died. The General Assembly of the United Nations voted to condemn the violence, and recessed for lunch and martinis. In America, there was no political will to redeploy back to Iraq. And after a few months of rabid bloodletting, the situation in Iraq calmed to a tense simmer of sporadic violence and political jockeying, punctuated by the occasional assassination, while several million refugees fled the country.



Only Kurdistan, in the north, which had thrown up a line of its Peshmurga fighters to keep the southern violence away, remained stable and at relative peace.



In the spring of 2008 America began its quadrennial circus of a national election, and in November elected a Democrat, the Junior Senator from New York, Hillary Rodham Clinton, as the next president, to the surprise of few.



Her running mate, to the surprise of many, was San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, whose intelligence, charisma, and reputation as an indefatigable campaigner for gay marriage and the homeless of San Francisco helped solidify Clinton's support among liberal Democrats who only grudgingly forgave her for not openly opposing the Iraq war sooner, and the Clinton-Newsom ticket went to the top with a narrow 50.2% lead over Republican John McCain's 49.8% of the popular vote, despite, or perhaps because of, Clinton's and Newsom's lack of foreign policy and military experience.



America, or a slim voting majority of it, felt it had all the war it ever wanted to see, and Hillary had led her party to a glorious (if narrow) victory with the unambiguous slogan: "Clinton & Newsom: No More War." Crowds at every whistle stop had cheered and chanted, No more war! No more war! No more war!



At victory parties George Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice were hung and sometimes burned in effigy, enthusiastic crowds chanted "No more war!" many times more, and local bands cranked up the theme from the first Clinton electoral victory, "Don't stop thinking about tomorrow...yesterday's gone, yesterday's gone...," and indeed, it was.



President Bush had been a very lame duck since the 2006 election, and with a Democratic Congress could do little but veto most of the bills it sent him.



The Democrats couldn't override his vetoes, so for nearly two years almost nothing important had been accomplished by anyone on the Hill or in the White House.



After the 2008 election it was transition time, flocks and herds of thoroughly demoralized Republican staff began leaving Washington in search of greener pastures, Congress adjourned for the Holidays, Democrats came house hunting, and Clinton and Newsom began the briefings they would get from a fully cooperative Bush administration on the state of the nation and the state of the world they would inherit and have to cope with for the next four years, or eight, and in those last weeks of November both Hillary and Gavin seemed to age rather quickly. The exhilaration of the campaign was over, and the weight of a tumultuous world began to settle on their shoulders.



Back in early October, 2006, North Korean President (for life) Kim Jong Il had announced the detonation of a nuclear bomb deep in a tunnel in the stony mountains of North Korea. The seismic signature had been small, and American intelligence at first doubted whether it had been a nuclear explosion at all. Traces of radioactive emissions were detected a few days later, and the intelligence estimate revised to conclude that it had been a failed test that produced perhaps only10% or less of the expected yield, only 0.5 to 1.5 kilotons, not the 20 kilotons, at least, that Western intelligence had anticipated.



Kim Jong Il gloated. The deception had worked. The Americans were thinking in terms of long range intercontinental ballistic missiles with huge warheads that they could shoot out of the sky with their sophisticated billion-dollar anti-missile defense systems. He was thinking in terms of small warheads carried by small, medium range cruise missiles that could be launched from many places, and infiltrated close enough to slip in under the radar and hit America's coastal cities.



On the evening of December 6, 2008, a junior analyst in the National Security Agency was going over routine satellite photo production of ship movements in the Atlantic and Pacific within a thousand miles of the US coasts. Late in the shift he thought he saw something through a haze of fatigue and caffeine, and called a supervisor over to talk.



"Look," he said, photos up on several computer screens, more printed out and spread across his desk, "See? These boats, not big ships, fishing boats, yachts, they've been moving in along shipping lanes for several days, across from the South Pacific toward the West coast, up from the South Atlantic toward the east. Nothing very unusual, they're all small and slow, and scattered up and down the oceans, it seems, but if you look at the times and curses..." and he pulled out a chart he had plotted, "They're approaching so they will all arrive at about the same time, or all be about the same distance off the coast at about the same time...," he trailed off.



The supervisor looked a bit quizzical. "Coincidence? Probably. You need more sleep. Too much fun in the night, eh? Let me know if you see something we can do something with." And walked away.



At 0723 Hawaii time on the 67th Anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack three old fishing trawlers, about 100 miles apart, and each about 300 miles off the east coast, launched six small cruise missiles from launch tubes that could be dismantled and stored in the holds under ice, or fish, and set up in less than an hour. The missiles were launched at precisely one minute intervals.



As soon as each boat had launched its pair, the skeleton crew began to abandon ship into a fast rubber inflatable. The captain was last off, and just before going overboard started the timer on the scuttling charges. Fifteen minutes later and ten miles away, each crew was going up the nets into a small freighter or tanker of Moroccan or Liberian registry, where each man was issued new identification as ship's crew. The rubber inflatables were shot and sunk, and just about then charges in the bilges of each of the three trawlers blew the hulls out, and they sank with no one on board and no distress signals in less than two minutes.



The missiles had been built in a joint operation by North Korea and Iran, and tested in Iran, so they would not have to overfly any other country. The small nuclear warheads had only been tested deep underground. The GPS guidance and detonating systems had worked perfectly, after a few corrections. They flew fifty feet above sea level, and 500 feet above ground level on the last leg of the trip, using computers and terrain data modified from open market technology and flight directors, autopilots, adapted from commercial aviation units. They would adjust speed to arrive on target at specific times and altitudes, and detonate upon reaching the programmed GPS coordinates. They were not as adaptable and intelligent as American cruise missiles, but they did not need to be. Not for this mission.



They were small, less than twenty feet long, and only 18 inches in diameter, powered by small, quiet, fuel-efficient, high-bypass turbofans, and painted in a mottled light blue and light gray ghost camouflage. Cruising at 600 knots, just below the speed of sound, they were nearly impossible to see or hear. They came in under the radar until they reached the coast. After that they were lost in the ground clutter. Nobody saw it coming.



At precisely 0753, Hawaii time, 1353 in the District of Columbia, sixty-seven years to the minute after the Pearl Harbor attack began, the first of six missiles to hit the Washington area exploded in a huge white burst of nuclear fire just 500 feet above the White House, which disappeared in a mist of powdered plaster and stone, concrete and steel. President Bush and President-Elect Clinton had been meeting with Condoleezza Rice and Mrs. Clinton's national security adviser, reviewing the latest National Security Estimate, when they instantaneously turned into plasma of the atomic elements that had once been human beings. No trace remained.



Alarms immediately began going off all over Washington, and precisely one minute later the second missile exploded just as it struck the Capital dome, instantly turning thousands of tons of granite that had one moment before been the nation's center of government into thousands of tons of granite shrapnel that shredded several square miles of Washington like a leviathan

Claymore mine.



At precisely one minute intervals, four more 3 kiloton nuclear weapons exploded at an altitude of 500 feet AGL above the Pentagon, the CIA headquarters, the NSA headquarters, the FBI headquarters, all of which were fully staffed in the middle of the day. In five minutes, the government of the United States of America was decapitated, and a quarter million of the people who made the place run were dead, or dying, or had simply disappeared.



Also at 1353 Eastern time, a missile had blown off just above the New York Stock Exchange, in New York City, and thousands of years of collective financial knowledge and experience evaporated in the nuclear flame. In one minute intervals, others had hit the financial centers of Boston and Baltimore, and the Naval base at Norfolk, Virginia.



Simultaneously, within the same 10-minute window of hell, nuclear-tipped cruise missiles devastated the largest intermodel shipping facility on the West coast at San Pedro harbor, exploded just above the Library Tower in central Los Angeles, and short circuited the computer technology ghetto of Silicon Valley in Santa Clara County, big time. One exploded ten feet away from the top of the Bank of America Building in San Francisco and set much of the east slope of the city ablaze.



Another giant fireball flared among the phalanx of office towers along the Capitol Mall in Sacramento, instantly obliterating Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state government of California, the largest state economy in the US, the seventh largest economy in the world.



Two ripped open the heart of Portland, Oregon, one shattered the financial district of Seattle, and the last one turned the Microsoft campus into a pillar of fire and smoke, wiping from the face of history, in a second, the IT giant that had revolutionized global communications.



It was 0803, Hawaii time. Ten minutes. Three million Americans dead. And not a trace of the assault fleet remained on the surface of any ocean.



Vice-President Elect Gavin Newsom was in his bedroom at home in Pacific Heights, his window overlooking the Golden Gate and the Marin bluffs. He thought he heard an oddly loud crack of thunder and saw a flash reflected on the hills across the inlet, but it was a clear day and nothing else seemed out of place. He continued packing for the return trip to Washington, his second since the election, to continue his transition briefings and begin organizing his staff. His nomination as Hillary's running mate had come as a huge surprise, and he was elated.



Someone rapped on the door, loudly, twice, and without waiting for a reply the senior Secret Service officer on his detail opened it and stepped quickly in.



"Come with me, now," he said. Gavin was startled. I need to finish packing," he replied.

"No time, sir. Something has happened. Very big. I fear. No details yet. We have to get you out of here, NOW! RIGHT NOW! GO! GO! GO!"



He grabbed Newsom's arm, swung him around, and pushed him out the door, where two other Secret Service agents flanked him down the stairs and out to a running black Suburban waiting in the garage. They pushed him into the back seat, jumped in, and the driver gunned the engine, out the drive, down the street, tires squealing. Nobody spoke until they were headed over the Bridge, northbound at seventy-five miles an hour, weaving through the traffic which wasn't yet the gridlock it would soon become.



"What the hell's going on?" he finally demanded. "Okay. This is what I know," the officer said. "The US has apparently sustained multiple nuclear attacks in the last fifteen minutes, including Washington D.C. and San Francisco. Financial district. We're not sure how many, at least ten, maybe twenty. Lots of dead. Got the White House, the Capital, the Pentagon. Our job is to get you on an airplane at the nearest functioning airport, that'll be Novato, and get you to a safe place. Prestissimo."



"Where?" Newsom asked. Things were moving way too fast now. "Don't know yet. We'll get orders." The Air Force Learjet had been airborne for two minutes when a cell phone buzzed, and the Secret Service captain answered it and handed it off to the Vice President Elect. "It's Mr. Cheney, sir," he said.



"Gavin?" Dick Cheney asked. "Yes, sir," Newsom replied, subdued, for the events of the last hour had sobered up his elated mood considerably. "Okay, Gavin. I don't know what you know, so I'll tell you what I can. There have been approximately 20 nuclear strikes on government and financial targets in the US, about an hour ago. No real damage estimate yet, except that it's awful. A hundred times 9/11, maybe a thousand times. I happened to be at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, and have moved into Cheyenne Mountain to set up a temporary HQ, until we get things sorted out. As you know Cheyenne was vacated by NORAD a few years ago, so we have plenty of space. You will be flown here, nonstop."



"I know you haven't a lot of national and international experience." Cheney had thought of saying that Newsom had none, but Newsom would be too painfully aware of that. He didn't need reminding. "The President is missing and presumed dead. So is Mrs. Clinton. So you may become the next president, in about six weeks. I don't know. The Constitution says the Vice President succeeds a president who is dead or disabled, but it doesn't say what happens if the President Elect dies before being inaugurated. I suppose the Court will have to answer that, if we can cobble one together by then. In the meantime, I will assume you will be inaugurated. You'll have a steep learning curve, a real steep curve. All presidents do, under the best of circumstances, and these are not the best of circumstances."



The next day a hard winter storm roared down the West coast from Alaska, pelting rescue workers in bombed out city centers with hard, cold rain, that did not let up for a week. People alive but injured or trapped in the wreckage died of hypothermia before they were found.



Two days later, a cold front out of Canada brought heavy snow to the Northeast. Millions were already without electricity, and in a week of subzero weather hundreds of thousands more died. More than four million, altogether. More than one of every one hundred Americans.



Al Qaeda had picked December 7 because it was the anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, and because, just before Christmas, the Infidel holiday, it would destroy the Christmas shopping season so important to so many retailers, driving another nail into the national economy of the Great Satan. And it would destroy the festive spirit of the season for millions of Americans, perhaps for all. The perfect psyop. Psychological warfare. And the weather forecasters had predicted severe winter storms on both coasts during the week immediately after disaster.



Al Qaeda leaders had calculated, correctly, that by turning up the violence in Iraq during the weeks before the 2006 election it could achieve an anti-war Democratic Congress that would vote to end America's wars in the Middle East, and then by turning down the violence in Iraq after the election of an anti-war Democratic Congress, it could lull America into a false sense of safety and security in anticipation of the "peace in our time" that America's new ruling party had promised would follow from what Al Qaeda perceived, correctly, as America's retreat before the unstoppable determination of the Islamic Resistance Movement, the Jihad. America did not call it that, of course.



The Americans thought they were just ending a bad and illegal war ginned up by George W. Bush to depose Saddam Hussein who had proven not to have WMDs after all, the ones the Americans had never found, the ones buried in Syria. Al Qaeda saw more clearly. It was a capitulation, a de facto surrender of the Middle East to the coming Islamic Caliphate that would someday rule the world. The martyrs of Islam had beaten the Great Satan to its knees. In time they would cut off its head.



By Christmas, the American economy had imploded. Inflation soared, nemployment soared, businesses closed, cities that had suffered direct hits became ghost towns. Tax revenues evaporated, leaving state governments without funds to pay unemployment benefits or teachers' salaries.



With the New York Stock Exchange gone, stock trading ended, and values plummeted.

Retirement assets and pension funds disappeared in a wink. Nobody knew what to expect. Real estate crashed, and major banks filed for bankruptcy. With the collapse of the American economy, the largest on earth, the most productive country on earth, with just 5% of the global population producing one third of the global economic output, the rest of the global economy fell into chaos. Oil shipments stopped, food shipments stopped, and in that winter millions of people in third world countries starved to death. The America era was over.



"In the spring of 1941, Nazi Germany was poised to dominate the earth. France, the Low Countries, Norway, Denmark, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Greece, and much of Poland had been overrun by the Germans. All of Europe, save neutral Sweden and Switzerland, was in the hands of Hitler's friends and allies: dictators or monarchs who ruled fascist Italy, Vichy France, Franco's Spain, Portugal, the Balkan countries, Finland, and above all the Soviet Union."



"A single German division under General Erwin Rommel, sent to rescue beleaguered Italians in Libya, drove Britain's Middle Eastern armies flying and threatened the Suez lifeline; while in Iraq a coup d'etat by the pro-German Rashid Ali cut the land road to India. In Asia, Germany's ally, Japan, was coiled to strike, ready to take Southeast Asia and invade India.



No need to involve the United States; by seizing the Indies, Japan could break the American embargo and obtain all the oil needed for the Axis Powers to pursue their war aims.



"Hitler should have sent the bulk of his armies to serve under Rommel, who would have done what Alexander did and Bonaparte failed to do: He would have taken the Middle East and led his armies to India. There he would have linked up with the Japanese. Europe, Asia, and Africa, would have belonged to the coalition of dictators and militarists."



"The Nazi-Soviet-Japanese alliance commanded armed forces and resources that utterly dwarfed the military resources that the holdouts, Britain (with its empire), and the United States, could field. The English-speaking countries would have been isolated in a hostile world and would have had no realistic option but to make their peace with the enemy, retaining some autonomy for a time, perhaps, but doomed ultimately to succumb. Nazi Germany, as leader of the coalition, would have ruled the world."



"Only Hitler's astonishing blunder in betraying and invading his Soviet ally kept it from happening." - David Frompkin, Professor of International Relations and History, Boston University, writing in What If: Eminent Historians Imagine What Might Have Been (Putnam 1999) pp. 308, 309.



History is made, wars are won and lost, cultures and nations and civilizations come and go, rise and fall, as much by blunders as by victories.



The failure of many Americans, including many of the leading Democrats in Congress, and some Republicans, to fully appreciate the persistent, long-term threat posed to America's liberties and survival, and to the future of Liberal Democracies everywhere, by an Islamic Resistance Movement that envisions a world dominated and defined by an Islamic Caliphate of religious totalitarianism, and which will fight any war, make any sacrifice, suffer any hardship, and pay any price to achieve it, may prove to be the kind of blunder upon which the fate of America turns, and falls.



Raymond S. Kraft is an attorney and writer in northern California.



Can't happen, you say . . . . . we'll see
Alan S
2007-03-29 20:55:01 UTC
P-R-O-P-A-G-A-N-D-A , propaganda


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...