Rush Limbaugh Program - November 18, 2005, Friday, Hour #3

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 18, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:28

November 18, 2005, Friday, Hour #3

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	That is absolutely right, uh Johnny Donovan, it's Walter Williams filling in for Rush.
	Uh this hour, folks, uh we have a great treat.
	We have Tony Blankly on with us.
	And he is the editorial page editor of the Washington Times, and he's going to talk to us about his new book, and it's called The West's Last Chance Will We Win, subtitled Will We Winish Win the Clash of Civilizations.
	Welcome to the show, Tony.
	Thank you very much.
	Delighted to be on.
	You've written a dynamite uh book.
	And and uh and I think it's something that needs to be said.
	But let me just start out with uh something and uh a question.
	Now uh President Bush assures us that Islam is a peaceful religion.
	Is that right?
	Well, I I don't get into that question.
	What I I I as I say in the book, I this is a secular book by a guy who's been in politics, secular politics.
	I'm concerned with our national security.
	Yeah and what I want to figure out is what are people and large groups of people thinking and doing.
	Now it happens to be the case that a growing percentage of Muslims believe that their religion tells them to do things which are inimicable to our security.
	Whether they interpret correctly or incorrectly uh their sacred books, I'll leave to the scholars.
	Uh it's beyond you know, and the truth is that there's not a religion around in which people have a dispute uh as to what its true meaning is, and they all believe they're correct in their interpretation.
	Uh-huh.
	So uh but to s but w it's an irrelevant, whether the religion in the abstract is a religion of peace or not, what matters in in this world is what people do.
	Yeah.
	What people think and who and if people are killing bec on on behalf of of their understanding of their religion, that is a political fact we have to deal with.
	Yes.
	And and how should we deal with it?
	I mean uh you you give uh in your in your last chapter, you give some proposals uh how to deal with it.
	Uh we have to strengthen our uh alliance with Europe.
	These are only first starts.
	Look, I don't uh i I I think everybody who's looked seriously at this danger recognizes this is a decades, if not generations long struggle, probably something at least as uh as long in time and as challenging as the Cold War, half a century.
	Uh I wouldn't purport to to be able to say how are we going to solve and win the problem.
	All I can start off with is a few first steps.
	And uh my la my last chapter, I I try to lay out a few first steps.
	Okay, why don't you why don't you tell us some of those?
	The the first step uh and is I believe we need to have a congressional declaration of war against radical Islam.
	Uh I believe that one because I'm a constitutionalist and I believe in following the law.
	Uh but as well both we I think we need a congressional declaration of war in in in order to give uh uh war powers to the president.
	This one, the next one, the one after him.
	Now, by the way, I do argue that because this is going to go on so long, and because there is a risk of infringement of civil liberties, uh there as always is in wartime, and I have a chapter on how we fought World War II, uh not because I think that operationally the wars are the same, obviously that was a vastly different one.
	Millions of men under arms and this is more struggle of information and episodically uh of physical fighting.
	But be but uh because because the danger of of infringement of liberties is so great, I think they should be sunset every two years so that each new Congress would have to revote the war powers, assuming the public just uh was w was satisfied the the president had not abused uh his wartime powers.
	Now you can you can argue with that, but my my basic point is I I agree with that.
	Uh my uh uh my basic point is that this is w one of the problems I I do a few few pages on this.
	People say, well, Tony, you know, we declared war on Germany and Japan or Italy, uh but there's no one to declare war on.
	And I agree that there is no nation state to declare war on in the way that it was in World War II or World War One.
	Uh but the problem is that we have never faced a danger as great as this from anything other than uh a nation state.
	Until now, for it to be a real national security threat, you have to have uh danger from a a fairly substantial country, a Germany, a Japan.
	Today, because of by a coincidence of history that for the first time in in human history, uh a handful of people can get their hands on weapons of mass destruction.
	We are in fact in a situation as dangerous as war, but not exactly like it in the traditional sense of the word.
	And therefore our history of of the law and our constitution doesn't provide specifically for how to deal with it.
	But we need to have those powers to protect ourselves and as uh uh Supreme Court Justice Jackson once observed the s the constitution is not a suicide pact.
	Uh I believe we have to let the law be a little creative and declare war on Islamist Jihad.
	Now the other part of that is we need to name the name of the enemy.
	And uh President Bush and I understand why said well it's a war on terror uh which is which is a concept, uh a tac uh a tactic, a technology perhaps it is it is not uh an entity you can declare war on in any practical sense.
	And he didn't want to name it, not only out of political correctness, but out of some concern that it was reasonable in two thousand one that we didn't want to induce more people uh in the Muslim world.
	The fifth of mankind uh uh are Muslims over a billion human souls.
	Not all of them are radical.
	Most of them probably still are not and he doesn't want to and it's reasonable we we need to shrink the number of radicals in that group, not expand them.
	Well well well such such a vision uh uh reduces some of the effectiveness of the policy I I would guess y yeah well but so so originally they didn't want to s use the word Islam in any way to you know say that that's the enemy even if it's a limited part of it because they're afraid that everybody would think we're it was all uh against all of Islam which it's not.
	However now after two oc invasions and occupations of two Muslim countries, I think we probably offended about everybody we're capable of offending.
	And now there's a real advantage both there's two advantages in naming the enemy as radical Islamists.
	One is that we narrow the focus of who our enemy is and over time the world will become aware that we're focused on a narrow segment or I hope it will be a relatively narrow segment that is the radical Islamists, not the rest.
	And the other advantage is that the president, any president has got to be able to explain his war fighting policies to his people.
	Uh and I it's not a question of eloquence.
	He doesn't have to be a Churchill or a Roosevelt but he has to be able to speak straightforwardly so we can understand what this is about and be have those regular conversations that wartime presidents have with their people and explain it's working here, it's not working here, the reason we're going here is for this he can't do that when he can't even name the name of the enemy and it's been one of President Bush's communication problems, if you will, in these last four years.
	So my first proposal is that we declare constitutional war on radical Islamist jihad.
	Uh a number of elements flow from that.
	I believe that ethnic profiling is f is fully justified looking at the Supreme Court opinions during World War two that were used for um interning enemy aliens.
	I'm not calling for that now.
	But the but the logic of the Supreme Court uh during World War II when they upheld the right to put Italian German nationals and Japanese nationals and even Japanese American citizens into internment camps was precisely that in time of war the we are allowed to assume that the there's an increased chance of of disloyalty from people who are ethnically connected to the enemy and therefore with that small increased risk during World War II the Supreme Court said you could actually lock people up.
	They couldn't have any access to the gov to to to our court system and it would be in for the duration.
	And and I th I th I think Tony uh that makes a very very important point.
	Uh you mentioned this ethnic profiling and where you have uh uh uh a secretary Norman Maneta saying that well gee uh w we can't do that.
	That is uh uh as you said in your book uh uh a white woman uh is viewed as uh uh just as subject to inspection as a as a Muslim person or as Islamists.
	Yeah I mean right now we have and it's a national joke and even liberals will giggle with you off the air on the idea that it's rational to to search twenty three year old Arab males uh foreigners at the airport at the same rate as you as you search two year old toddlers or eighty five year old grandmothers.
	Uh it's obviously ludicrous and we shouldn't and the law does not expect us to be ludicrous.
	So we this is not a cure all some people are going to fall through any crack and it's not just at airports, it's going to be in sensitive jobs, people working looking for work at at docks and chemical plants and nuclear plants, uh any sensitive positions, we have a right to scrutinize more closely.
	I was born in England, became American citizen many decades ago.
	If we unlikely got into a war with Britain, uh I would expect as a loyal American citizen that I would be slightly more suspect of of having loyalties to my f to my motherland.
	And I would uh it would not disappoint me, and I would in fact be disappointed if they didn't check me out more closely.
	Being a loyal American, it wouldn't bother me at all.
	So the second step is ethnic providing third, I think we need to secure the borders.
	And it's doable, by the way.
	The idea that it's not doable, I don't believe, even inside Homeland Security.
	In fact, I know they've done a study of what it would take to secure the Mexican border.
	That's right.
	Uh and it would take this is not yet their policy, but they've done a study.
	Uh it would take between twenty and fifty thousand more security uh border guards plus technology uh uh sensors.
	And uh while those are big numbers compared to the number of uh border security we currently have, they're relatively small numbers compared to the amount of money we spend as a country, the number of people we have working for the federal government overall, the amount of money we're gonna spend on rebuilding New Orleans, it's uh it's a relatively it's a very doable number.
	Now that's that's right.
	Uh we we I have to go make some money.
	And and we'll come back and I want to ask you the question about your proposal for uh national identification card.
	Uh folks, we'll be back after this.
	You're listening to Rush Limbaugh.
	On the excellence in podcasting network.
	Folks, we're on with uh Tony Blankly uh talking about his new book, uh fabulous new book, uh The West's Last Chance.
	And Tony Blankly, uh he is the editorial page editor for the Washington Times.
	And for seven years he also served as press secretary for uh uh Newt Gingrich when he was the uh in the House of Representatives when he was a speaker uh to the uh in the House of Representatives.
	Uh Tony.
	Yes getting back, uh I w one of your recommendations is to uh uh adopt a national identification cards.
	Uh do you think that uh is uh a danger.
	I do, absolutely.
	I uh a biometric national ID card.
	Yes.
	I come to this for me personally as a conservative, uh it's the most controversial proposal I make.
	I came to Washington in nineteen eighty one with Reagan.
	I was part of the Southern California libertarian wing of of the Reagan Revolution.
	I was a prosecutor for eight years in Los Angeles before that, and I believe me, I understand the ability of the federal government or the state government or the local government to abuse law enforcement power.
	I I experienced that capacity, although I didn't do it when I was a prosecutor.
	So I I don't I hate the idea of a national ID card.
	But one of my points in this book is that I've put my preconceptions, all my philosophies and and and ideologies to the side and try to look a fresh objective look at the facts and what we need to do.
	And what I determined, and you know, others can make different balances of uh of interest, and these are all questions of you know citizens have to make.
	They should be thinking about them and making them rationally and thoughtfully and with all the information and and whatever the American public decides is fine with me.
	But for me, I decided that we cannot really s either secure our borders or provide the kind of of anti-terrorism uh law enforcement work that we're gonna need desperately to protect ourselves from calamitous attack, and we can at some point get into a little bit uh the likelihood of a really calamitous uh attack on us.
	Uh without a w without a biometric that is a virtually impossible to cheat on.
	Well well, let me uh let me ask you uh uh your your idea on this.
	That is rather than uh take those risks in terms of uh of uh American citizens' uh uh chances of uh inf uh infringement of liberties that would come through uh a uh an identific uh ID card.
	Uh what about very, very heavy sanctions against people in here illegally.
	I'm I'm talking about I'm in favor of that.
	I'm talking about I'm I'm talking about taking people who are found here illegally and putting them out uh uh on some US territory and island and keeping them there for life as a punishment.
	I I I will go along with any sanction y you want.
	No, but you're very including including criminal sanction for any employer who knowingly hires an illegal or should have known given given normal business practices.
	But that would be wouldn't that be preferable or do don't you think it would work?
	I I don't think it's preferable because it's not while it's certainly the case, and we we have testimony now from Admiral Lawyer at Homeland Security, that he believes, based on the intelligence he's seen, that Al Qaeda and others intend to penetrate our southern border through illegal entry.
	So certainly we absolutely positively have to secure the border.
	But it's also the case, as the British found out, all six of the terrorists who who hit Britain uh London uh this July were homeborn.
	They were l they were British citizens, they lived there, they were born in in Britain, and they were terrorists.
	And I just believe that it's a very important thing.
	So they they they could have is largely a struggle of information withheld and sought, uh as they say, and and the clandestine movement of dangerous weapons.
	And in that regard and keep in mind also, by the way, that forty percent of the people who get into the country illegally come in legally uh via tourist visas, work visas, uh other means, and then they they stay illegally and melt into the population.
	So even after we've secured the border, we're not stopping illegals from get from from from getting into the country.
	Uh I just think that this is one more tool that we need to have in our government, and it worries me b because as a libertarian I I fear big government as a conservative, obviously I want a small government as possible.
	I'm just at this point in our history, right now, I judge my my personal judgment is that the danger to us is greater from the terrorists than it is from our government, although we always have to keep this closest possible scrutiny on our government.
	But as I say, y I'm open to other alternatives.
	All I'm saying is that my judgment is that the danger is so great that this intrusion at this point uh is I think uh more benefit than than than Burton.
	I'll have to take that on his own.
	I know you will.
	But uh uh you you you highlight some scenarios of some possible dangers.
	Could you uh point them out to us?
	Well, yeah, yeah.
	In w I I opened my book with uh with a nightmare scenario, uh and it was a situation where radical Muslims in London started demonstrating and complaining about representational art that they found offensive because under i Islamic traditions of art you don't have the the human image,
	you don't have statues, and so they said they were starting to demand that they be taken down in London eventually, in my scenario, uh that leads to uh demonstrations and then terrorism in Europe and then the European governments capitulate and start pulling down their artwork.
	Uh the the other part of it uh is Amer an American president, Republican candidate uh behind by a few points, running against the Northeastern Liberal woman candidate in in the Democratic Party who has taken a very hard stand on on Islam on radical Islamists, decides because of uh the critical Muslim vote in a number of states, decides to take a chance and calls for Sharia law to be available to them and that flips the election and changes things.
	Uh but uh uh But that that that could happen in Europe, couldn't it, before it happens here.
	Well, it's I mean it's arguably the case.
	Not not Sharia law uh so far, although there was an effort to do it in Canada, it got knocked down in Ontario a few months ago, but it was being pushed for.
	And in fact, one of the things that multiculturalists argue to some extent, is that since each culture is valid unto itself and there's no virtue in a in a common culture, that you know, that that there's no reason why you shouldn't permit people to have their own law as well.
	So yeah, I think it it's altogether possible to think it happen.
	Uh the other uh I I should point out that I wrote all that before uh July 6th, when uh seventh, when there was a Muslim attack, uh terrorist attack in London, and then a couple months later, the Tate Gallery, which is one of the great museums of the world based in London, withdrew an artwork because uh it was judged to be offensive to to Muslim sensibility.
	And I understand that uh uh some banks had to uh stop some advertisements over using a pig, you know, for piggy band.
	And one of the reasons I thought that it was likely that that would come up is not only the theoretical tradition of of Islamic art, and of course they're entitled to to have any art they want in in their own sovereign lands.
	Uh but I I also was Hey Tony, can can you hold that thought?
	We have to go make some money.
	Can you stay after the break because a couple wanna ask you some questions?
	Uh folks, we're on with uh on Tony Blankly.
	He is the editorial page of edit of the Washington Times, and he's just written a book, an excellent book, The West's Last Chance.
	Will we win the clash of civilizations?
	This is vital because I think that we are facing one of the biggest threats since World War II.
	We'll be back.
	We're back and we're on with uh Tony Blankley.
	He's just written the book, the West's Last Chance, and you can be on with them too by calling 800-282-2882.
	Tony, can you take a few calls?
	Yeah.
	Let me just finish one quick thought and then take them.
	The one of the other things I I wrote was that we should anticipate urban violence in a number of European cities starting with Paris.
	So uh for whatever it's worth uh I don't think it takes clairvoyance to take a good look at what's going on in Europe and disciple more and more problems.
	Oh the current problem in France.
	I think it is a combination.
	I don't discount that poverty is a wonderful medium in which ideologies and all sorts of bad ideas can be developed.
	But I don't for a minute believe that it is simply looking at merely through the prism of economics, as Westerners tend to do, explains it.
	Because in fact, there are large parts of the world, and particularly radicalized Muslims, who see the world not just through or particularly through economics, but also through their culture and their religion.
	and those are other motivations.
	in fact there's already some evidence that one of the the man at the bum factory that was uh d that was found in in Paris was a member of Tegreb which is a radical Islamic group that's that that argues against integrating into into the European culture.
	So and there's an important difference between the the uh the Muslims uh uh who have come to United States versus Europe and that is uh uh they are far more assimilated in the United States absolutely be you because we are a land of immigrants we're we're we we're more receptive to any kind of an immigrant uh we we th it's harder to be persuasive when you've got the idiotic ideology of radical Islam here in America and it's easier to make the case in Europe and there's no doubt about that.
	But the fact is the case has and is being made in Europe and that's the increasing danger.
	And and then also in France uh they are uh the French people are somewhat intolerant of other cultures and other languages.
	Well yeah I mean they're intolerant of all of us I love the French and I spent many happy weeks and months there over the years.
	But but they're uh difficult people to get along with that's right.
	Uh uh Bob you're on with uh Tony blankly for telling the call I appreciate it.
	Uh Mr. Blanke I read excerpts of your book on the Washington Times and I truly believe the threat is just as real as you present it.
	One thing is going on today how do we overcome this political and media opposition to recognizing this threat.
	All you have to do is start picking up newspapers, read editorials, and look at what's going on in the Senate today.
	Uh mining of this problem I I don't know if any master plan for it other than the speak out.
	I think the best cure for political correctness is to breach it.
	Because in fact a good percentage of people who who follow political correctness don't don't follow it other than out of fear.
	And if people sit s start standing up and speaking the truth uh to to a certain extent the Emperor's new clothes, the fairy tale was a story about political correctness and all it took was one little boy to stand up and say the Emperor had no clothes and everyone said well of course he doesn't but until someone stood up everybody was afraid to talk.
	So the more people both in in our own private lives and in our public lives who speak up and s uh honestly about it and tell their congressmen and senators by the way and their city councilmen you know they're not going to put up with with with us and let their media outlets know that they're angry with the with the political correct coverage the sooner the the this will pass as a scourge on our and and so many Americans are are intimidated.
	They're they they feel that you can end careers you know in a in a lot of corporate America you've got to be very careful what you say or that's the end of your career and even in private life you say something people will scrunch their nose.
	You don't want to have people scrunch their nose at you but this is a time for courage I think not a time for timidity.
	Yeah right uh I I know if I had to worry about people uh uh scrunching their nose I uh Barry uh welcome to the show you're on with uh Tony blankly I just want to say uh do the Democrats really think if we pull our troops out right now if the Iraqi government that we got established will be able to continue on and go forward as they are right now.
	If we pull our troops out right now what do they really think is going to happen.
	Well I don't want to I'm I've never been a spokesman for the Democrats.
	I have for the Republicans in my past life.
	But let me take a guess.
	I think the vast majority of them consider winning the next election and and embarrassing George Bush to be about the Alpha and Omega of their political thinking and they and for whatever reason they have either in reduced the the the danger or refusing to think about the danger of of their policy being carried out and it is uh an impending tragedy should it be successful.
	And and Tony uh I I'm almost seventy years.
	I'll be uh seventy years next year.
	That's no age.
	My dad's 94.
	My mom's 91.
	And I think back to World War II and when we were in a fight for our life, and I just cannot imagine any opposition party doing what the Democrats are doing now.
	And they're kind of, I guess, mean-spirited and I guess I can't find a word for it, the way they're treating the president.
	treating the the war on on terror that is if if I were an an Iraqi uh uh uh terrorist I'd be very happy for what the Democrats are doing and people calling for people called John Murther is is a star feature on Al Jazeera today and I looked it up on the internet Al Jazeera.net and uh he he is being given prominent coverage for his statement.
	Now he's entitled to dissent and say anything he wants you know with it's a free country and I and I I don't deny anybody the right to to dissent and call for different policy but on the other hand I think we have a right to criticize them not for their ill intentions uh but for the ill judgment in in in calling for this.
	There's no doubt this does help the opposition.
	One of the prices, of course, of living in a free country is that we're an unruly lot.
	I'm shocked by the way the Democrats are behaving, but all I know to do in a free country is to try to persuade as many people as possible to the rightness of our side of thinking.
	And if enough people think that way, I mean, they've only started moving because the polls have moved.
	I mean, all these people who voted for the war, probably insincerely then out of fear for their own careers, and now they're switching as soon as possible.
	as the polls slip ten points uh and the polls move back the other way they'll suddenly find the Bush is right after all.
	Uh I mean we know what what type of mentality this is.
	But but you know a future generations of America if if any of these scenarios pan out you know in the future twenty five, thirty years from now that you're suggesting your book I guess that future Americans are going to curse this uh present generation uh uh present generation who are worrying about how we're treating cutthroats well let me let me tell you in uh getmo and and uh Abu uh Gharaeb you know there were no more popular politicians in Britain than Stanley Baldwin and
	uh Neville Chamberlain and and up right up until nineteen thirty nine uh Winston Churchill was despised as a warmonger uh and and they were the most popular politicians because they were putting more money into municipal housing funding rather than into aircraft production.
	And then when the Nazis marched into Poland overnight the politicians who had been the heroes of the British people for ten years suddenly became the villains and they were vilified and and remain vilified in history.
	So yes of course you can you can win temporary popularity by by ignoring dangers and and and pe offering people bread and circuses but at some point when when when the when the danger becomes manifest when people are actually afraid again as we were briefly after September 11th the politicians who were on the wrong side of the advice will pay a price.
	And we have a bunch of people that I want to talk to you.
	We'll be back with more of your calls after this.
	We're back.
	I'm on with Tony blankly now Tony I have a question.
	Yes.
	And that is uh I have a classroom policy And I'm wondering whether how adaptive you might think it is to foreign policy.
	And that is at the at the first day of class, I tell the students, I say, look, I'm getting old and I lose my train of thought easily.
	And if a cell phone goes off in class, uh that that's it.
	It's just awful.
	And so I tell them that the what happens to the student whose cell phone goes off, I deduct ten percent of his total points for the semester.
	And I deduct ten percent of the total points of the student sitting on either side of them.
	Well, you're teaching them economics, right?
	Uh uh yes, I am.
	Now that creates the right set of incentives.
	That is uh uh student comes next to the student and asks, do you have a cell phone?
	Okay, now.
	So so they here's the foreign policy aspect of it.
	And I say, well, look, uh let's say if a terrorist attacks our interests, let's say uh let's say comes into uh Iraq and we tell we tell the people, look, uh if we find that terrorists came from your country, we're gonna bomb your country.
	Well, I mean I all I can say, I mean, uh if if the country was complicit, knowledgeable uh in in that, I would agree.
	On the other hand, if we get a terrorist who comes from uh you know uh Des Moines uh I don't want to bomb Des Moines because he's stuck in the Des Moines.
	I was picking my spot, but I think nobody has anything against Des Moines.
	I was gonna say Malibu.
	I thought well there'd be some people who would say le let's bomb.
	But uh I think one's gotta recognize that at a time when the terrorist by by the you know, as I said, all the all the terrorists in London were home homegrown.
	Uh it's it's not as neat as that.
	I if we if we can find a territorial entity that's responsible, I'm completely in favor of that.
	But I wouldn't want to bomb London because somebody took off an airport.
	Of course not.
	Uh okay, we have some people uh with more serious questions.
	Uh uh Mike on a cell phone from Detroit and Michigan.
	Welcome to the show.
	You're on with Tony Blanke.
	Thank you very much, gentlemen.
	Uh I would take issue with Mr. Blankly's assertion that uh Muslims uh assimilate better in the United States, living in Detroit with a large Muslim population located right about me.
	Uh I can tell you from life experience that they don't move into other neighborhoods next to uh next to blacks uh or uh uh you know French American, Irish American uh uh they stay in their own neighborhood and they move it block by block by block with their large birth rate,
	and they feel that they have the moral high ground because they look at us as a agnostic, decadent, godless uh society, which is why I feel in Europe they which is even more so that way, we are still a Christian nation for the most part, and in Europe it's like fertile because they become basically agnostic.
	And in my book I I repeatedly say that the dangers we're seeing in Europe today uh can very easily be here tomorrow.
	Uh I'm not it was not an absolute statement at all that that we are immune.
	Quite the contrary, I believe, and I write in my book, that we have to be just as serious about the danger here as the Europeans need to be.
	I just think that at this point, from what everyone can tell, and it's only anecdotes, you haven't seen too much I haven't seen too many good reliable quantitative analyses, it hasn't set in as badly here.
	But the danger is the same, and uh the instinct is the same, and we need to be completely on our guard, and I think that may very well require uh you know monitoring of mosques and incentives because you if it gets as bad as it is in Europe and ten years ago it wasn't as bad in ten years ago Europe thought they didn't have a problem in this regard.
	So I don't disagree with the caller.
	Uh I think it's a matter of degree and time, but ten years is a very short period of time.
	And thank you, Mike.
	Uh Mike, uh we have another one.
	Uh I'm not quite sure whether I'm gonna Thomas from Grand Rapids uh Michigan.
	Welcome to the show, Thomas.
	You're on with Tony.
	All right, thank you very much.
	I I uh kind of agree with uh Mora.
	I'm a former Marine also.
	Uh I see uh thing that that he sees we have Syria and Iran that are sending in supplies and terrorists to kill our troops, and we do nothing, just like in Vietnam with Laos and Cambodia, they're sanctuaries, and but at least in Vietnam we bombed them.
	We don't do anything now.
	Right now, I agree at the Washington Times we I already regularly editorialized uh against Syria and and and Iran and and uh urge the the president to take action because uh one of the advantages we have uh there v rather than in in uh Vietnam was it's easier to to hit those targets.
	Uh you know, you don't have the jungle cover and all the rest.
	So I completely agree.
	It's it's I can't I cannot understand why the president has permitted all of these terrorists to be coming into Iraq through Syria.
	I'm running an article next week by a Marine Sergeant in the field, uh his name will go uh without being mentioned, but uh who's describing what's actually going on on the ground, and he's talking about the number of uh terrorists who are coming in from Syria that they're having to kill when they get here, uh when they get to Iraq.
	So the the caller is exactly right.
	Yeah, thank you very much.
	We have to take a break, uh Tony.
	Can you just hang on one more section?
	Because I've got a couple more calls.
	And and what do you think of this before you got to think about this?
	I was thinking that maybe we should adopt a policy that when we catch a terrorist, let's say he blows himself up, that we bury him with a pig.
	Well, I've heard that.
	If if that will be useful, I'm in favor of it.
	Uh I believe we're in a battle to the death with radical Islam.
	And we should act like ruthless as we have to be to win.
	That's right.
	Thank you.
	We'll be back after this.
	Folks, uh, we're back, and we've been on with Tony Blankley.
	He's the uh edit editorial page editor of the Washington Times, and he's been talking to us, uh giving us a lot of insights about his new book, uh The Last The West's Last Chance.
	Tony, where can people get your book?
	Uh well, Amazon.com, any any big book store, other sites that sell online, uh t wherever wherever good books are sold, as they say.
	And and bad books too, I think, in the same place.
	Spoken like a Britisher.
	Now, um th there in the in the last in the last uh paragraph of your uh last chapter, uh you say that uh uh today in the first four years of our war against uh Islamic uh Islam terrorism uh t when it when time could have purchased a far cheaper price, we have squandered it.
	Can you just explain that just a little bit, huh?
	Uh yes, I think we're we're suffering from complacency rather than urgency.
	One example I'll use.
	The biggest new program in Homeland Security since September eleventh was uh Project BioShield to develop vaccines to protect us from biological attack.
	It took the g uh the White House a year and a half to come up with the legislation.
	It took the Congress another year and a half to pass it.
	Three years just to pass the enabling legislation, which gets us nothing other than the beginning of the project.
	Compare that to the sense of urgency we had in World War Two.
	In j in June of nineteen forty-two, Roosevelt uh assigned Leslie Groves the job of of seeing if uh if Einstein's theories have uh have any relevance to war fighting, and in three years, uh they spent the equivalent of twenty-three billion dollars, hired a hundred and thirty thousand workers and scientists built build uh cities in the desert, conceived, developed, perfected, tested, and delivered to the Army Air Corps two atomic bombs that ended World War Two.
	Three years now just diddling around passing trying to pass legislation, three years in World War II from beginning to end of war.
	Uh that's the that's the the mentality.
	Right now we have terrible shortages of Arab translators.
	We're doing nothing about it.
	You can go through the book.
	We're only we're only inspecting two to five percent of the cargo containers coming into the country.
	You everywhere you look, we're just sitting around being complacent.
	And then we're gonna pay a terrible price for that wasted time.
	And and then on top of it, a whole lot of the homeland security uh budget is being politically allocated as opposed to any kind of efficient.
	That's the whole other question.
	I agree with you.
	Uh that you know, I think they've improved it a little bit in the last legislative go-round, but yes, we we're not taking this seriously.
	We don't recognize we will recognize when when the when the bodies are being piled up, then we'll recognize we'll wish we had spent our time so much more uh productively than we have.
	And it's not just the president, it's it's Congress, it's the media, and to a large extent it's the general public that is not screaming and hollering for more action.
	That is right.
	You've done a a world of service with your book, and I thank you for coming on to uh explain to our and thank you.
	Thank you very much.
	Uh ladies and gentlemen, that was uh Tony Blankly, and I think he has a very, very important message uh in his book about just the survival of America.
	And if we don't pay attention to these clues, these uh warnings that we're getting, I guarantee you that future generations of Americans will curse us.
	That's been a fast three hours.
	Uh get out there and do and uh gentlemen, men of the audience, look around the house.

▲