All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 23, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:22
August 23, 2005, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Wouldn't that be great?
Wouldn't that be fabulous?
Greetings to you, thrill seekers, conversationalists, music lovers, and lovers of your country.
You are tuned to the most listened to radio talk show in America.
A program that meets and surpasses all audience expectations, a program whose agenda is not set by the mainstream media.
Great to have you with us.
Telephone number, if you want to join us, is 800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at EIBNet.com.
Case in point, formerly nicotine stained fingers, our old buddies at the Associated Press in a story from Vacaville, California.
Let me, in fact, before giving the headline, let me read to you the lead.
A caravan proclaiming support for U.S. troops began a tour through California on Monday, stopping in the hometown of Cindy Sheehan, the only parent of a dead soldier the American population has ever heard of, who gained national prominence because we in the media promoted her because we hate the president and will do whatever we can to help the left and our buddy.
This is not what the story says, but I mean, this is.
Here's the headline.
Bushbackers amass to counter peace mom.
No, they're not bushbackers.
They are pro-Americans.
AP.
The right headline here, pro-America backers amass to counter Peace Mom.
Or even better, pro-America backers amass to counter anti-Bush Peace Mom.
If you want to be accurate with the headline, if you be accurate with the story, and this is exactly the kind of rot-gut-driveling bilge that I am talking about that the American people get treated to each.
Oh, there's a second page of this story.
Forgive me.
I forgot to throw it away, too.
Let's move on to another item here, shall we, ladies and gentlemen, from the New York Times.
This Abel Danger story just won't go away.
Now we've got a second identified source.
What did you say, Mr. Snerdley?
What did you say?
Well, I'll just give you the details here.
An active duty Navy captain has become the second military officer to come forward publicly to say that a secret intelligence program tagged the ringleader of the September 11th attacks as a possible terrorist more than a year before the attacks.
The officer Scott Philpott said in a statement yesterday, he couldn't discuss details of the military program, which was called Abel Danger, but confirmed that its analysts had identified Mohammed Atta by name by early 2000.
My story is consistent, said Captain Phil Pott, who managed the program for the Pentagon Special Operations Command.
Atta was identified by Abel Danger by January, February of 2000.
Once again, I simply ask, who was president then?
And it wasn't George W. Bush.
The statement from Captain Phil Pott, who's a 1983 Naval Academy graduate, served in the Navy for 22 years, was provided to the New York Times and Fox News through the office of Representative Kurt Weldon.
Asked if the Defense Department had questioned Captain Phil Pott in its two-week-old investigation of Abel Danger, another Pentagon spokesman said he didn't know.
Representative Weldon also arranged an interview on Monday with a former employee of a defense contractor who said he had helped create a chart in 2000 for the intelligence program that included Mr. Atta's photograph and name.
Now, the reason this is important is because some of our friends on the right, who are scared to death of being caught up in something that might embarrass them, have been raising all kinds of objections about the story.
Their first objection was, well, anonymous sources, we can't go to bed with that.
I mean, that's like Newsweek.
And then when one source came up, well, but this guy Schaefer, I mean, he doesn't have any documents.
He really can't prove it.
What's Weldon doing?
And then Weldon himself talked about this chart that had been prepared by this group, but Weldon says he doesn't know where the chart is.
Well, today we get a second name.
Mr. Philpott comes forward, Scott Philpott and Wilson.
Weldon also arranged an interview Monday with a former employee of a defense contractor who said he had helped create this chart in 2000 for the intelligence program.
So we've had people doubting.
Weldon can't possibly be telling the truth.
He's got to be making this up.
Why?
These people won't come forward.
He's talking about a chart.
What chart?
We haven't seen a chart.
Well, here come the people.
Here come the names.
And here comes the chart.
So, and meanwhile, the Pentagon said, we don't know anything about this.
The Washington Times today has a story by Rowan Scarborough.
Pentagon investigations found no evidence that Abel Danger, a secret military intelligence operation, identified September 11th hijacker Mohamed Atta as a terrorist cell member more than a year before the attacks.
Larry Dorita, the chief Pentagon spokesman, said investigators have failed to find a chart that Abel Danger supposedly created before the winter of 2000.
It listed Atta as a member of an al-Qaeda cell in Brooklyn.
Now, I don't know when the Times story was put to bed.
It's in the paper today, but I don't know what their deadline was yesterday.
The New York Times posted the story I just read to you about 10 o'clock last night on their website.
It might well be that the Washington Times did not have the information that the New York Times and Fox News did.
But nevertheless, it's still bubbling out there.
And there's, you know, more names continue to come forward.
And the chart, you know, all of a sudden here shows up.
New York Post decides to tackle this today.
A small story.
Respected naval intelligence officers stepped forward last night to confirm that a secret Pentagon program raised alarm bells about Mohamed Atta more than a year before.
And they cite the evidence that's mentioned by Captain Scott Philpott, former manager.
He's a former manager of Abel Danger.
He issued a brief statement saying the data mining program identified Mohamed Atta as a possible threat.
Philpott said in his statement, my story is consistent.
Atta was identified in January, February, 2000.
I have nothing else to say.
So it continues here to just percolate out there.
And it's something that it's not going to go away.
It just isn't going to go away.
The 9-11 Commission is, somebody's going to have to do something to make this go away.
But it's not going to go away.
This is getting too close for comfort.
A lot of people now.
Two of them in particular, Bill Clinton and Jamie Gorellik.
So just keep a sharp eye on this, folks, because it's apparent that people who know what they're doing on the Abel Danger side of this are drawing opponents out.
And with each criticism offered by the opponents of the story, well, that can't be there.
They then come, oh, okay, you want that?
Here it is.
You want that?
You want the chart?
Here's the chart.
Oh, you want another name?
Okay, here's Captain Philpott.
Yes, Mr. Snowden, What's the question?
I tell you, I view that.
Mr. Sterdley wants to know how do I view the Pentagon and all this.
I've answered this question.
I think at this stage, and I think even before the 9-11 Commission was impandled and put together, I've told you what I think.
The objective here is to protect the political class of Washington by name.
It's okay if a building ends up being blamed or some obscure unit somewhere or some wall.
They'll blame a wall, but we're not going to, the people are going to go to the mat here to protect the political class.
They will do whatever they can to avoid this whole thing ending up at the feet of a single person or a couple of three people.
That's what I think.
How effective will they be in doing this?
Well, how effective are they in what?
What are you asking me?
I don't know what you're asking.
Oh, how effective is the Pentagon in protecting us?
The Pentagon, Ms. Sterley wants to know how effective is the Pentagon in protecting us.
You could ask the same thing about the State Department.
Depends on who's in it and running it, who has control over it.
And in the Clinton administration, there's your answer.
We know how the Clintons treated members of the military.
We know what they thought of them.
We know the Clintons could put as many sympathizers in the Pentagon, the Defense Department, and the State Department as they...
People have this misguided notion that the military, the Pentagon's full of hawks and full of people who are really going all they want to do.
They're just itching to go out and kick ass all over the world, but responsible Americans are reigning them in.
But inside, they're nothing but a bunch of Dr. Strange loves and George C. Scott's out of that movie.
You know, that if you give them half a chance, they'll go out and nuke everything.
That's the popular conception of what's inside the Pentagon.
People would be stunned to learn that there are as many anti-war doves in the Pentagon during a Democrat administration, if not more so than the type of person you normally associate with the military.
I mean, we know it's not a big secret.
Not every member of the U.S. military is a conservative.
Not every member of the U.S. military likes military victories.
Not everybody who goes into the military goes into it because they support what the age-old role has been.
I don't doubt that there are people that join the military getting the higher echelon to subvert the whole organization.
I mean, if a liberal in a ditch in Crawford, Texas distrusts the military, what's to stop an academic liberal who wants an appointment to the Pentagon to have some influence there, to having the same sort of impact at the Pentagon while being there.
A liberal's a liberal.
A tiger is a tiger, no matter where you put them.
You can put a tiger, like it happened out in Kansas, on some little ranch that's designed to train them to act in movies and bring in a little girl, 18-year-old girl, to be a picture taken.
And everybody is stunned when the tiger does what tigers do.
It's a predator.
Well, a liberal in a ditch in Crawford is no different than a liberal in the Pentagon, other than where they are.
But a liberal is a liberal.
Never forget this, folks.
This is El Rushball 101.
Back after this.
Stay with us.
America's Anchorman, America's Truth Detector.
The Excellence in Broadcasting Network, El Rushball, back to the phones now, Washington, Missouri, outside St. Louis.
This is Cliff.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
How are you doing today?
Just fine, sir.
Thank you.
Hey, Rush, we need to go back in time a little bit.
I remember listening to you when Clinton sent troops into Bosnia and it was announced that they were going to be there during Christmas.
You were the biggest critic.
You were acting just like Cindy Sheehan is.
You were running parodies like there's a turkey in the White House now.
You said things like, we'll have mistletoe, why you will have frozen toast.
Do you remember that?
Yeah, absolutely.
I remember that.
I stand by it even today.
Well, now, the shoes of the money.
But for you, now, wait, Cliff, wait just a second now.
We got to go back and we got to try to get your mind right on some of these things because, yeah, we did parodies throughout the Clinton years, but the difference, you know, you say I'm doing like Sheehan is doing here.
That's what we were doing in Bosnia.
There's a huge difference, Cliff.
We wanted to win in Bosnia.
We wanted the president to be victorious.
We supported the military.
We didn't cream on the military.
We didn't backtrack from them.
We didn't do it.
We questioned the way Clinton was fighting it.
In fact, he didn't have the guts to say the U.S. was going over there.
We did this under the auspices of NATO.
And then we conducted the war from 15,000 feet so that he would not suffer any casualties to his approval numbers.
We didn't want to lose the Americans, so we fought this war from 15,000 feet.
Even McCain said, you got to have ground troops.
The criticism of Clinton was oriented toward, hey, let's do this right and win it.
There was not one member of my staff, my show, or anybody on the right saying, let's get out of there.
This is unjust.
This is ignoble.
We have no right to be there.
We didn't trot out a Cindy Sheehan or any other parent of one who died over there and said, how dare Clinton do this?
There was none of that.
There was no effort to oppose the objective in Bosnia or in any of the other related entanglements that we had.
I remember Dole during the 96 presidential debate, he was asked a question, what are you going to do to different about Bosnia?
And Dole, I'm not going there.
I am not going to question the president on this war.
Politics stops at the water's edge, and I'm not going to provoke an argument about that here.
The next question was something, you know, Clinton was, or Dole was asked about, about Social Security or some welfare program, I forget what it was, welfare reform.
And Dole did take out after Clinton on that.
And Clinton's response was, no attack ever fed a hungry child.
Remember that?
No attack ever fed a hungry.
Let me tell you something, Cliff.
Honest to God, you got to be very careful about this, my friend.
I love you.
I'm glad you're out there listening.
But if you think that there were anybody on the right that was doing anything comparable to the anti-war left during Bosnia or any of the other related conflicts, you are sorely mistaken.
And you've really got to re-examine your memory on that.
David, in Allentown, Pennsylvania, welcome.
Great to have you with us.
Yeah, Tiger.
True to form, you're very hard at work today trying to divide America as usual.
You would love Americans to hate each other.
You are really the un-American here.
You are not the patriot.
You know, calling Chuck Hegel an American, you know, when he, he's a war hero from the Vietnam era.
Yeah, so.
So?
We all have a right in this country.
Does that give him moral authority, just like Cindy Sheehan has moral authority because she's lost a child?
Does that give her moral authority so she's never wrong about what she says?
Just because Hegel went to Vietnam, is he never wrong about what he does?
If you can't recognize an effort to unify this country when you listen to this program, you'll never be able to recognize it.
You know something, David?
I have obviously touched a nerve in you and made you feel very defensive, and that always happens when I tell the truth about liberals.
The fact of the matter is, I get up every day and I look at the news and I look at the things I believe in being attacked.
I look at the traditions and the institutions that made this country great under assault by people like you.
So what do I do?
I come here and defend them.
And I then begin to analyze the people who are attacking them.
It's your side that's the attack dogs.
It's your side that's trying to promote disharmony and disunity.
It's your side that's trying to do everything you can to make sure this effort in Iraq fails.
You can't call here and tell me I can't question your patriotism.
And if you want to say that I can't question your patriotism, then fine.
I will instead say I question your loyalty in addition to your brain.
Chris in Salt Lake City, welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
I got to hand it to you, Rush.
Teddy Gone Wild is pretty funny, I have to admit.
Listen, I called because when I hear you talk about Cindy Sheehan and the liberal media, it makes me think of how quickly you jumped on the liberal media bandwagon when it came to the Terry Shaivo situation or the Monica Lewinsky scandal.
It really seems like you just criticize the liberal media when they report something you disagree with.
And if what you said is true, that the Clinton administration left a big mess for the Bush administration regarding bin Laden and al-Qaeda, why don't you tell me one thing that the Bush administration did to combat al-Qaeda and bin Laden before 9-11, and I would appreciate an opportunity to respond to your rebuttal.
I'm not going to accept the premise of any of this until I get some more answers from you.
Let's go back to the question.
Let's go back to Shaivo.
What in the world are you talking about?
Shaivo and me?
I didn't follow that.
There was clearly media-saturated coverage of the Terry Shaivo situation.
I didn't hear you once complain about that.
It was the opposite.
You jumped on that bandwagon because you thought it fit your agenda.
Do you disagree with that?
Totally.
I think you're ⁇ I don't think you could be more wrong.
There was a media-sponsored bandwagon hoping the woman would be allowed to die.
There was a media-sponsored bandwagon saying, get Bush and the government out of this.
See how they have no right.
Leave this family alone.
This woman is brain dead.
She's worth nothing to anybody.
She had her chance.
Let her die.
I was responding to that.
My point is that you clung on to that and you used it to your advantage.
You didn't criticize that that case in particular was being saturated by the liberal media.
It was the opposite.
You used it.
I think you got that wrong, too.
Well, can you answer my last question about what the Bush administration had done before 9-11 to combat bin Laden and terrorism?
Yeah, they were busy tearing down some of the walls the Clinton administration had built so they could learn what had gone on.
Actually, that's not true.
Well, actually, it is true.
Actually, it is true.
Let me finish.
Let me finish.
As a matter of fact, John Ashcroft did nothing to tear down the walls between the FBI and the CIA.
Only after 9-11 did he do so.
Yeah, because he was having trouble doing so.
In the 9-11 committee hearings, he testified to the existence of the wall.
He testified to the problems that he was having with it and what they were doing.
This is a neat trick.
Pass the buck.
All of the problems that led to 9-11 happened in years prior to Bush being elected, and yet somehow it's Bush's fault.
It doesn't work intellectually, but nice try.
In another feudal attempt, another in a long line of many years of feudal attempts to call me on something, the left is now claiming that I, during the Bosnia conflict, treated Bill Clinton much the same as Cindy Sheehan is treating George W. Bush because of some parodies that we put together.
So I thought we'd go back and get the parody since they enjoyed it so much and remembered it.
We might as well go to the groove yard of forgotten favorites and bring back some happy memories.
We'll get this parody, but let me put it in context for you.
Bill Clinton at the start, was it Bosnia or was it in Bosnia?
He gave us the one-year deadline.
He said, people are going to be home by Christmas.
I'm only going to be over there for one year.
I'm going to get him out of there.
I got him.
I'm going to take care of business.
I'm going to bring him home.
And they're still there, by the way.
And I haven't heard Ms. Sheehan, the only parent the American people know of the 1,800 sets of parents who've lost a child in Iraq.
Isn't that amazing to you?
Of all the 1,800-plus families who have lost a son or daughter in Iraq, we only know the name of one parent.
Thanks to the mainstream media.
That would be Ms. Sheehan.
I noticed that the troops are still in Bosnia, by the way.
They're still there.
And we get periodically stories about how those blue-helmeted incompetents from the U.N. can't keep the peace if they had to because they're too busy out there committing sex crimes down in Africa.
So we have to stay there because the UN is incompetent.
But I don't hear Ms. Sheehan demanding that any of those troops be brought home.
Only from Iraq.
So we put together this apparently famous Christmas parody after the President Clinton, after President Clinton's stated deadline of one year had passed, simply to draw attention.
In fact, he said they'd be home in a year and that they weren't home.
And by the way, George W. Bush is never given a deadline in terms of the Iraq war.
He's never said it's going to take this time and bring them home.
It's going to be done in two years.
In fact, he said it's going to be a long time.
And we're not leaving until we get it done right.
The idea that there's any kind of correlation congruence here just is simply absurd.
We don't forget, folks, don't challenge us on what we've done in the past on this program and don't dare, don't dare say that what we're doing is in any way similar to that being done by the malcontent squatters down in the ditch in Crawford, Texas.
Mike and El Paso, you're next.
I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Megadittos.
Good.
Hey, if memory serves me right, I don't believe President Clinton spent any time with the Shugard or Gordon families after they perished in Somalia.
I think the only time he saw them was the day he presented the families the medals.
And he actually caused that problem because we had M1 Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles offshore, and he refused, even while the Rangers were getting shot up, he refused to bring them on shore to go and rescue them.
That's not true.
For Pakistanis to show up.
That's not true.
That's not true.
I must come to President Clinton's defense here.
That was Les Aspen, the Defense Secretary.
Roger, right, right, right, right.
That was Les Aspen.
But you think Bill Clinton had anything to do with this?
The Secretary of Defense has all the power.
And Clinton, you know, Les Aspen.
And I know this because Aspen took the heat for it.
Ask Aspen.
I was a little confused on that part.
But either way, nobody was jumping on President Clinton on the back.
I'm kidding.
I'm kidding.
I'm saying they sent Aspen out there as the pincushion, as the piñata to take the hits for it.
You're absolutely right.
I was just trying to tease the left.
Maybe, wow, Limbo's defending Clinton.
Just have a little fun with him out there.
But you're absolutely right out there, Mike.
You couldn't be more right.
We all know what happened with Blackhawk Down.
Yes, we, well, when I say we all know, the ones who count know what happened.
You know, let me recount this for you.
Let me just, very briefly, folks.
Somalia was a country in Africa, is a country in Africa.
And you can make book on this.
Every now and then, we're going to get stories about starving in Africa.
It just happens.
There's always starving in Africa, no matter how many rock stars do benefits, no matter how many truckloads of food and grain.
I mean, there's one going on today.
There's a new, Niger or Niger.
Last year, it was Darfur in the Sudan.
Before that, you name it.
There's always a new country being added to the list and always the UN comes, we need money.
We need assistance.
No, I will not resign.
We need more aid.
And who do they call Area Code 202?
Washington, D.C. They're not calling that great lover of freedom and independence Hugo Chavez when they need aid, and they're not calling Fidel Castro when they need aid.
They dial area code 212.
And then after they make the request, they then blame area code 202 for the starving in Take Your Pick, Somalia, Darfur, Sudan, now Niger.
And of course, there's Rwanda.
We don't even want to talk about that because you know when that happened.
And we apologize for that.
It's good, but it still happened.
So one day in the latter years of Bush 41's first and only term, we started hearing about the starving in Somalia.
And then we started hearing about this warlord, Mohammed Farad Adid, nicknamed affectionately here, Mohammad Farah Adid Sahib Skyhook.
And because the guy loved basketball.
Favorite player was Lou Al Cinder.
Sorry.
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.
And so we kept getting the reports and the television spent a lot of time on it.
But one day, and I kid you not, one day there was a front-page picture on the New York Times.
And it was of a starving little boy in Somalia with the obligatory flies buzzing around his head, the bloated belly, and the empty plate being dipped into a muddy puddle, hoping for a morsel of food.
And at that point, the American people say, I can't take it anymore.
We've got to do something.
So George W. Bush, sorry, George H.W. Bush assembled a mission to feed the starving millions in Somalia.
And the mission was sent.
It was a mission basically of meals on wheels.
The U.S. military was used.
They meals on wheels.
And I will never forget this.
The press, the United States press, Camera Cruz and all camped out on the beach as the Marines first landed.
Now, the Marines were landing as, okay, there's a way you do this.
You're landing in enemy territory.
You just, you wait for nothing.
And here are the press wading out from their perches on the beach, wading out knee-deep in the ocean water, trying to interview the Marines as they came ashore.
The ultimate mission was to feed the starving Somalians.
It was the most comical thing I have ever seen.
The press got there before the military did.
The press got there and the Somalians continued to starve.
The press didn't starve.
There was obviously food somewhere in Somalia, but the Somalians were starving and the press looking fat, dumb, and happy, lounging around on the beach, waiting for the Marines to arrive.
Marines arrive, and all of a sudden there's hope.
And the Marines are followed and they set up their camp and they immediately start setting out to feed the people.
And all of a sudden, one of the first truckloads of grain, the people storm it.
They are starving.
The people just, and all of a sudden, they are mowed down and shot dead in cold blood by operatives of Mohammed Farad Adid Sahib Skyhook, who then drives off with the food.
And lo and behold, we learn that it's happening again.
The starvation and the famine brought about by a government, a dictatorship government, and Mohammad Farah Adid at the time was a disciple of Osama bin Laden.
He had set up an Islamic state and he was running the show.
After this kept happening, the mission changed.
All of a sudden, we found ourselves in a mini-war.
And we still trying to negotiate a settlement.
In the midst of trying to meet with some representatives of Mohammed Farah Adid in Mogadishu, a trap was set and the U.S. Army was attacked.
Helicopters were shot down.
The army requested more assistance.
We need more equipment.
Call Washington and Les Aspen said, no deal with it, with what you've gotten, and get out of there.
The last picture we saw was of a naked U.S. ARMY Ranger being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu and that action was being cheered a standing ovation by the people we were sent there to feed.
Not long after, it was Osama Bin Laden, in an interview with John Miller, then with ABC, who said that story.
That instance, that episode is what convinced me that the American people and the Americans do not have the stomach to take casualties.
They're a paper tiger.
This happened after President Bush left office and Bill Clinton was inaugurated.
This happened within the first six months, first nine months of Clinton's first year, his first term.
That's what happened in Somalia.
That's what happened.
That's blackhawk down.
I've summarized it very briefly, but that is precisely what happened.
So we, even when we set out on missions of goodwill and essentially, meals on wheels, and yet, even during that period of time, I don't recall the American left upset with Bill Clinton once, I don't recall any Cindy Sheehan type standing up and protesting and I don't recall anybody suggesting that Bill Clinton go meet with the parents of these fallen rangers.
Just don't recall.
It may have happened, as the caller said, at the ceremony where they were given their medals, but I don't remember it happening prior, prior to that, and I certainly don't remember any protests.
Quick time out.
We'll be back after this.
Stay with us, okay.
The ditto cam is on.
We have a three CCD device here, a charged couple device, and two of the charged couple devices were not charging.
We got to back up and running the ditto cam.
Up and running for the remainder of the program.
Mr Sterdley, I have a research project for you.
You're doing it in there.
Um, I need you to go back to the time of uh Blackhawk Down and the uh effort that we made to uh bring freedom and food to the people of Somalia.
Would you go find for them?
I need the mother, the name of the gold star mother of that ranger that was dragged dead through the streets of Mogadishu.
Could you find?
I want to know the name of the gold star mother, uh of uh that, that that soldier, and I want to know where she protested.
And and uh, you know, just give me all that you can.
Pete and Troy Michigan, welcome to the EIB Network.
Hi hi Rush uh, super Dittos.
Thank you, sir.
Uh, I have to admit i'm.
I'm a I have to confess, i'm a spy.
I've been listening to AIR America uh, since it came on, the radio off and on, and and, quite frankly, I almost drive off the road sometimes when I have a master's in history and, and these people are so naive about history they have no clue.
Uh, our history proves.
Well, I just have a question.
Yeah, you're listening to AIR America.
Well, once in a while I got to get the no, but where do you?
What kind of radio do you have that picks them up?
Uh yeah, it goes on and off.
It's not real strong but uh, mostly in my car and uh, I didn't.
Well, you must be driving very close to the broadcast towers because they're on stations that basically have a range of five miles straight up.
No you're, you're right on about that, because it comes and goes.
But the our history proves that we, we are a great and noble people.
If you go back to World War Ii uh, we rose up and defeated on two fronts people that hated us to the core, the Germans and the Japanese.
And what did we do afterwards?
We were the most benevolent conqueror the world has ever seen.
We had the world's greatest industrial capacity.
Wait a second.
Wait wait, wait.
We didn't conquer anybody.
We liberated.
And I know what you're saying.
After we liberate these people, we rebuild their society and we rebuild their country.
It's called the Marshall Plan.
You can look it up.
And liberals generally love it because it's one of the greatest big government programs ever came down the pike.
But I know what your point is.
We don't conquer and we don't destroy.
We liberate and we rebuild.
And that, frankly, is what we're trying to do simultaneously in Iraq.
In other examples, we didn't care.
We destroyed whatever we had to destroy.
There wasn't any political correctness.
Whatever it took to win the war, we did it, and then we rebuilt.
What we're doing in Iraq is making sure we don't have to rebuild as much, so we're not destroying as much.
So if these little terrorist weenies want to hide behind the skirts of women and the dolls of children in a mosque, then they can do so with relative impunity because we're not hitting the mosques because of a number of political considerations.
I want to show the Iraqi people that we have no interest in destroying the country.
In fact, rebuild it.
But it's a tough thing to combine in one mission, which is, Stern, are you really looking at it?
There was no such thing as the Gold Star Women, was there back in the year.
There were Gold Star Mothers back then.
Well, then get me the name of the...
Okay, I want the name of the Gold Star Mother of the poor guy dragged through the ranger dragged through the streets of Mogadishu.
Quick time out.
We'll be back after this.
You see, where the federal government has issued another, not really a warning, but a theory.
They think that terrorists might be posing as homeless vagrants, members of the endless parade of human debris, so to speak, which would give them a leg up in casing joints, casing buildings, scoping them out.
The homeless, nobody pays any attention to them.
In fact, you see a homeless group, you walk the other way.
I mean, you don't want to get involved.
And so the federal government is warning people now to be on a sharp lookout that the latest terrorist, what would you say, front men, are posing as homeless people in order to case out various potential targets, which this is true.
It means that these people are also showing up at homeless shelters because you know, at least to eat, because when you start offering free food, I mean, even a terrorist will show up.
It's the nature of, you know, give something away, and the people show up for it.
So it might be a way to catch them.
Anyway, quick time out here.
We've got an hour of broadcast excellence left to go.
Sit tight.
The EIB network and El Rushbo.
Remember, the mainstream media does not set the agenda on this program.
▲
Export Selection