Rush Limbaugh Program - August 10, 2006, Thursday, Hour #3

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 10, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program

33:45

August 10, 2006, Thursday, Hour #3

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	And welcome back to the program, ladies and gentlemen.
	1-800-282-2882 on a momentous day.
	This isn't just a warning.
	This isn't just an elevation to some new color.
	This is the arrest of 21 people, the suspicion that 50 at least were involved, the Brits breaking up a ring that would have blown up six to ten airplanes leaving U.K. and coming to the United States.
	And if you're traveling today, you're traveling under extreme circumstances.
	No liquid unless you're willing to, and if you have, you know, baby milk or Jack Daniels, you've got to take a swig before you're going to get on, so it doesn't turn out to be nitroglycerin, although Jack Daniels is close.
	1800-282-2882.
	Now, um, I know I'm going to get letters on that, aren't I?
	Um.
	Tuesday uh election results did not simply shatter incumbency dreams for Senator Joe Lieberman.
	Uh we'll get to his race in a moment.
	But to others, uh voters in both parties seem to be in a uh let's uh refine our message mood by throwing out other incumbents, Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, a slightly unhinged Georgia Democrat, uh best known for uh slapping a Capitol Hill police officer with her cell phone.
	Apparently she had not yet gotten the uh you know, sold the chip to his bullet, but um, had um scuffled with the uh Capitol Hill Police, accused Bush of uh President Bush of having foreknowledge of the 9-11 terrorist attacks.
	Anyway, she lost as well and uh had a little musical kind of send-off in did you see this uh musical kind of send-off in her uh press conference uh when she sounded like this.
	Minimum wage with the baby on the way.
	Let me tell you about hard work.
	Okay, minimum wage.
	What does she make?
	160 grand a year, whatever it is.
	In any event, I um that was Cynthia McKinney.
	Now uh uh and I love Russia only played this once the other day.
	It deserves to be played again.
	Uh a little parody here uh about Cynthia.
	Well, there you go.
	Al Sharpton in a megaphone there.
	That's actually, of course, Paul Shanklin, PaulShanklin.com, a little parody there.
	The original song, of course, for those old timers, Dr. Hook and the Medicine Show, Cynthia's mother.
	Uh we are back, uh ladies and gentlemen on the Rush Program.
	I'm Roger Hedgecock, and uh it wasn't just the Democrats.
	You have probably heard uh by now that um Congressman uh we're on Michigan today.
	Congressman Joe Schwartz was defeated in Michigan in uh the primary by Tim Wahlberg, a small government uh conservative, uh club for growth type candidate, and a uh uh border guy, uh guy who wanted a stronger borders, and uh more liberal Joe Schwartz was uh defeated.
	So both parties appear, and I think this is a good thing, to be moving away from triangulation and being all things to all people, and can't we all just get along?
	To sharpening their message, to sharpening the differences between them.
	Yes, ladies and gentlemen, we are going to have a partisan blowout election this year and in 2008, because there is a big debate in this country about whether to be the kind of America that the Bush administration wants us to be,
	proactive against the terrorists, hard-nosed against the terrorists, recognizing the war we face, uh, you know, getting after uh the uh the terrorists where they live rather than waiting for them to come here.
	Are we gonna be that kind of America?
	Or are we going to be a McGovern?
	You know, we're back to 72, a McGovernite America.
	See, McGovern beat Lieberman this week.
	Now his name was Ned Lamont, but it's the same thing.
	It's the uh it's the rage of the white limousine liberal male, who is after.
	Uh poor Mr. Lieberman.
	Uh the caller we had a caller today who said uh, you know, he's a liberal, but uh hey, it's a war.
	And he represents a Democratic Party that since 72 has been eclipsed.
	On particularly on the activist level, particularly now in the blogs and the and uh the the multimillionaire limousine liberals that support him like George Soros and Ned Lamont.
	Here Here in Connecticut, Harry Truman.
	Harry Truman lost on Tuesday.
	JFK lost on Tuesday.
	Scoop Jackson lost on Tuesday.
	FDR, for Crying Out Loud, lost on Tuesday.
	This isn't the party of those folks.
	This isn't your father's Democratic Party.
	This isn't your grandfather's Democratic Party.
	This is another animal altogether.
	This is a McGovernite party.
	You remember after McGovern got the nomination in 72 and then of course disastrously lost the election because Americans are not a cut and run people, by and large, we are not, even in an unpopular war interested in defeat.
	We are not interested in retreat.
	We are not interested in totally blowing it.
	An unpopular war means we just have a greater demand for victory.
	Most of us.
	But because of the McGovern takeover of the Democratic Party in 72, what did the Republican Party get?
	Gene Kirkpatrick, Paul Wolfowitz, the so-called neocons now are the ex-Democrats, the Scoop Jackson Democrats, who were strong on defense, who wanted America because America was good to play a stronger role in the world to oppose tyranny, to spread freedom, to spread democracy, to spread free trade, all of these things.
	Now Ned Lamont comes along and reconfirms the McGovernite opposite point of view.
	And has to answer the question, it seems to me now, and so do all of you, and I would appreciate your call.
	What would you do now?
	The troops are there.
	We're fighting the war.
	We're killing the enemy there.
	We're capturing them here.
	We are intercepting their plots here.
	We are running them down here.
	What would you do different?
	The Hartford Current asked this question of Ned Lamont during the course of this election, and I'm sad to say that the voters of Connecticut must not have been paying attention, because it's very odd the kinds of answers Mr. Lamont gave to the questions posed.
	Who's the greatest threat to U.S. security?
	He says North Korea, not mentioning Iran.
	Okay, North Korea's a threat.
	Let's talk about North Korea.
	So they ask him, what's your suggested approach to North Korea?
	He says, well, quote, we can't work North Korea alone.
	South Korea, Japan, and especially China are key, unquote.
	Okay, well, that's what Bush has been doing, not to great effect, by the way, for what, the last two years?
	Six party talks, that's all we've been doing.
	Then, in contradiction to that, Mr. Lamont says to the reporter, um, that the White House, however, should be talking, quote, directly, unquote, with Pyongyang with North Korea.
	Well, wait a minute.
	Are we going to have the six party talks?
	Are we going to go with multilateralism?
	Are we going to go with our our partners?
	Are we going to go with a multilateral approach, the multination approach, which is all we hear from the Democrats?
	You can't be a unilateral cowboy, or are we going to go unilaterally?
	You can't have it both ways.
	Well, apparently Mr. Lamont did have it both ways.
	Did have it both ways.
	So I'm sorry, Mr. Lamont, there are some of us and all of the rest of you folks in this wing of the Democratic Party, this new Democratic Party, this McGovernite approach.
	There's some of us who remember what happened when you prevailed in 1975.
	When you and congr influenced Congress to cut off the aid to the South Vietnamese, even though they were quite willing, as we were pulling out, to take on their own defense, we cut off all aid to them as well, ensuring their defeat and the bloodbath that followed.
	The domino theory in the 70s was that if South Vietnam fell, all the other nations would go communist too.
	The domino theory was right.
	Laos is communist today.
	Cambodia was in the killing fields and is not now only because we come back.
	How many millions of people died there because the domino theory was right?
	Because the defeat in South Vietnam led to a bloodbath because communists do not do not like opposition.
	Communists kill opponents.
	And this is what happened in the bloodbaths that followed.
	How many more bloodbaths do we want on our conscience?
	For instance, in Iraq and Afghanistan, were we to follow Ned Lamont and declare victory and go home?
	The McGovernite, I thought it was gone.
	I thought it was gone in the 70s and 80s after Reagan's victory.
	It's back.
	And it's back with a vengeance.
	And I want to get your your take on this now as we get into let me take a short break and we'll get into your calls.
	I'm Roger Hedgecock, Infor Rush 1800-282-2882.
	Back after this.
	Welcome back to the Rush Show.
	I'm Roger Hedgecock here at the EIB network, uh, Rush Limbaugh.com.
	Don't forget that.
	1-800-282-2882, our phone number, of course.
	Now, I uh have been reminded that I was remiss in going back to um look at the uh uh course listeners are uh way ahead of me here today.
	Uh look at the character of Hezbollah, the character of Hezbollah.
	And we talked about how they deliberately built uh in this fellow's uh village a uh bunker for the rockets and then put a school and a residence over the bunker so that then uh the Israelis either got the got the uh rockets or if they bombed the rockets, they got the world opinion turned against them because they killed civilians in the school in the house.
	Uh that's the way this has been going, and that's the way this war is.
	It gets worse.
	You'll remember that uh when uh the two soldiers were kidnapped by Hezbollah, there was talk about, well, yeah, but the Israelis have hundreds of our guys.
	We want we want our guys released.
	Uh we want some kind of uh prisoner exchange.
	We they they they kidnapped our guys first.
	Let me let me focus this.
	Uh Samir Kuntar is one Lebanese prisoner who is held by Israel.
	He was captured, he was captured in Israel in a group of Hezbollah fighters who had come across the border, had uh killed some settlers, including a four-year-old girl who had been killed with a rifle butt in front of her parents by Samir Kuntar.
	Uh he had been captured by uh the Israelis, and uh in this um uh in this capture, he was sentenced to prison.
	In other words, he came in with his four-man group.
	At that time he was at the Palestine Liberation Front, uh, the affiliate of uh PLO, shot a policeman, forced their way into an apartment building, captured Danny Heron and his daughter Anot, four years old.
	Um tar and his group took Danny and Anot Haran down to the beach of this little village.
	They were right on the coast there, shot Danny in front of Ainot so his death would be the last thing she ever saw, and then smashed the little girl's skull against a rock with his rifle buttons.
	That's the person they want back.
	That's their highest priority.
	They named him by name as demanding the release of a prisoner.
	Their highest priority.
	We want him a hero.
	A hero of our fight against the Zionists.
	Um that's the kind of personality I'm afraid that the president of Iran has too.
	And I'm afraid that when Mike Wallace goes there, does an interview and calls him a fine fellow, not insane at all, a very intel uh very smart uh fellow, uh, he's obviously has very strong feelings about the Zionist state, says Mike Wallace.
	Uh Mr. Wallace, the Zionist state is a phrase uh we would normally in the West say Israel because that's the name of the country.
	The Zionist state is the phrase used by Arabs whose goal in life and as many lifetimes as it takes, is to murder every single Jew and extinguish Israel as a state.
	Mr. Wallace, you're on their side when you use their vocabulary.
	Sorry, that's just the way it is.
	Now, I believe we're trying to get the Attorney General of the United States on the line, and we will do that in order to get his take on the Ohio arrests, the Egyptian student arrests, whether there's a tie-in with the arrests in the UK, by the way, twenty more are sought in the UK on this bomb plot uncovered today against the airplanes coming in from the UK into the United States.
	In the meantime, Jim and Richard Vir uh Richmond, Virginia, is on the Rush show.
	Hi, Jim.
	Hey, how are you doing, Roger?
	Basically, what I want to call on the day in light of what happened in Britain is that I I think it's time to take the gloves off politically and personally.
	I think it's time to call the people who refuse to look at the overwhelming evidence on the war and terror what they are.
	They're morons and they're useful idiots.
	Now I know a lot of people would react to that in a very emotional way, but I asked the people who would react to that, ask yourself basic questions.
	Where did Hezbollah get the fifteen hundred rockets or more that they fired in Lebanon?
	Where did they get unmanned drones?
	Why did eleven Egyptian students um register for a college in Montana and not show up?
	How long do you think it took for these people who are arrested in Britain to plan this massive attack?
	I mean, it wasn't conveniently planned because Joe Lieberman lost the primary, like one of your callers I believe alluded to an hour ago.
	Do you really do you really believe that we're not in a war on terror?
	If you do, in my opinion, you're an intellectual idiot.
	And not be given credence in the political realm.
	And I would like to see our our politicians who know better.
	They have the intelligence.
	They are on the inside track.
	They get briefings, they know we're in a war.
	They know this is real.
	They see the updates.
	Call people what they are.
	Okay.
	Use the words you want to use so you don't have to take the political heat for it.
	And for people in your personal life, if you really believe what we're in what we're doing, when people speak out and they say dumb things, point it out.
	Yes, you're not going to be popular.
	You're probably going to be called a name, but so what?
	This is a different world.
	Jim, I appreciate the call.
	And uh the uh number of suspects arrested now is up to twenty uh four.
	But the beauty of American democracy is that you, the voter, are going to get a choice between the vision that Jim just outlined of the point of view of the war and the point of view of the war of the people, like Cynthia McKinney, who believe that Bush actually uh set up the attack on the towers, that the more we fight terrorism, the more we create terrorism, etc.
	You're going to have the choice.
	It's called election.
	More after this.
	Roger Hedgecock in for Rush Limbaugh.
	On uh the line uh we have the Attorney General of the United States, Alberto Gonzalez.
	Uh Mr. Attorney General, welcome to the program.
	How are you, Mr. Mayor?
	I'm fine, sir, and I appreciate that uh uh sense of history you have.
	Ancient history, by the way.
	History is important.
	Yes, it is.
	By the way, I've been talking about that all day.
	Uh I wanted to get your take.
	How serious was this threat that we've been reading and hearing and seeing uh all day long the reports of with regard to these planes out of the UK?
	Well, you know, I'd have to I'd have to uh characterize it as as uh very serious threat.
	Uh and I think that uh we have a plot here that was very sophisticated, uh multiple actors um requiring, I think, um exquisite timing, uh very sophisticated uh method of uh injuring people.
	And um I I just think it highlights the fact that um that uh we are dealing with um people who are very patient uh and very smart.
	And um as the president said today that uh we're safer today than we were before nine eleven, but we're certainly not safe.
	I'd like to focus too on the internal threat uh I think there's been some downplaying by Mr. Chertoff today as to the threat in the United States itself, but there have been some remarkable stories, the story of the eleven Egyptian students who were seeking uh English language instruction for a month in Montana, and most of them never quite made it that far.
	The two uh uh American-born uh folks out of Dearborn, the high school students uh I guess twenty years old now, but high school graduates out of Dearborn who were caught in a situation that suggests a support of Hezbollah as a cigarette smuggling rings that have been busted by the FBI recently suggests as well.
	How do you read the Hezbollah presence in the United States and whatever threat that they pose within the United States.
	Well, they they do uh they do pose a threat.
	It's something that uh that we watch carefully.
	Uh I mean we have an obligation to to uh uh study those kinds of threats and um you know so it's it's not just certainly it's clearly not just Al Qaeda that presents the threat to the United States or the there are other terrorist groups um there are there are domestic you know uh threats.
	Uh sometimes we we may get information relating to the activities of a sole person, one an individual and so we have an obligation um in the law enforcement community to follow up on the all those threats.
	I know Bob Muller's dedicated the director of the FBI is dedicated to doing so and uh uh it we really ask a lot of of the fine men women in the Bureau to to run down all the leads of threats against the United States.
	I mean um every morning I review the intelligence the threat assessments against the United States and um believe me these are there are things that I read that uh that I worry about I I I hope so.
	Uh Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez with us because I'll tell you uh Mr. Gonzalez I I've been I've been um concerned living along the border here in San Diego of course about uh the not just the workers coming in but you've got uh tens of thousands of people uh some I just read an article it's 45,000 that have jumped uh into the United States and uh and then not shown up at their hearings and so forth even th though they were apprehended they were released and told to come back for a hearing.
	They didn't come back for the hearing and they're and they're from uh nations that you have on a list of of uh terrorist uh nations.
	So uh I I worry about that and I wonder uh since we don't know where these tens of thousands of people are uh how how how high is your confidence that we have control of the situation well again uh I can't put it any better than then I think we've done a lot to make America safer.
	Uh we've spent a lot of money uh to secure our airports, uh to secure our borders, uh we have additional resources, we have additional tools, additional laws like the Patriot Act.
	We now have a brand new department, the Department of Homeland Security.
	Uh many of the uh federal agencies have reorganized themselves in a way to be more effective and efficient in dealing with terrorism.
	We we, for example, in the Justice Department we're we're trying to stand up a new national security division so that we can be more effective in dealing with terrorism.
	So I've done I think we've done a lot, but clearly I mean more needs to be done.
	It's it's very difficult in an open society like ours where we uh we have democratic freedoms that um people want to exercise.
	We obviously are also concerned about um uh restrictions on movement of of goods and services along the border that may and somehow adversely impact our economy so these are all things that we have to weigh in uh in trying to arrive at a a a good solution to um uh security on our border uh I you me you talked about the situation where uh people are apprehended and told to come back in forty-five days at a court date.
	I mean that obviously is not working.
	It's not w has not worked and makes no sense.
	Now the President has talked about this repeatedly it's something that we that we're gonna change and have changed and so uh we just need to do a better job um uh with respect to uh border security.
	The President's talked about comprehensive immigration reform and um we're committed to it and we hope we're hopeful we can still get something done this year.
	Alberto Gonzalez is the Attorney General of the United States in the Bush administration and uh Mr. Gonzalez uh you mentioned the Patriot Act.
	There's obviously a continuing debate about this are there parts of that act where specifically do you think it ought to be strengthened or do you th uh changes that ought to be made.
	Well we're continually looking at uh what additional tools that we need to have to make us more effective in dealing with terrorism.
	We've been we have been successful in uh uh getting the tools that we need from Congress.
	Uh we will continue to go back to Congress uh if there are additional things that we need.
	Uh one of the things that we do for example is we study very carefully the laws in other countries.
	We we study carefully what's available to the prosecutors in Great Britain and uh if there are things that seem to be working over there dealing with this new kind of enemy, you know we think about whether or not we should have legislation uh in this country.
	So it's an ongoing process.
	Uh again always we we understand the importance of protecting civil liberties and uh and so in everything that we do, we keep that in mind, but we also feel a very strong obligation to do what we can do to protect the American people.
	Any arrests likely in the United States as a result of today's arrests in Britain?
	Well, you know, what we do is investigate criminal wr possible criminal wrongdoing, and if we if we feel like that uh that has happened, we bring charges.
	Uh and uh depending on the facts of this particular plot and um uh there may have been some criminal wrongdoing that that could be subject to criminal charges.
	But but uh we'll be working with our uh British counterparts, uh obviously uh uh uh they'll they'll have the lead role in terms of prosecutions, and uh uh we'll be working with them to ensure that uh whatever happens that uh these folks will be brought to justice.
	The uh transportation safety folks uh today clamped down a whole bunch of new rules on people traveling on planes, uh, particularly with regard to carrying on liquids in light of the uh liquid bomb making uh uh suggestion coming out of these arrests.
	Um unfortunately that g again gives the impression that everyone is a suspect who gets on an airplane, uh subjected to uh, you know, this this kind of uh of intrusion.
	I can't take my uh shaving cream on the on the airplane anymore because uh I might be a bomber.
	Well, I'm not a bomber.
	Uh in World War II, uh, you know, we focused on the Nazis, uh, we didn't focus on American citizens, and if there were Americans who were sympathizers to the Nazis, we found them and we focused on them.
	How come we can't focus on our enemy here and try to in effect give the impression that every American is the enemy?
	Well, but I think I think uh this is a a new kind of enemy in a new kind of war.
	And I think, moreover, I think with the advent of the internet, um, where you can have people that never leave a country, they get educated about the ideals of uh of um Al Qaeda, for example, and they can get trained over the internet, they can in essence wage a virtual jihad over the Internet.
	Uh and so uh the threat can very easily come from within as opposed to from without.
	And I think that's um part of the the new challenge uh that we have to deal with.
	Um you know, what we're trying to do here in terms of protecting America against this type of enemy is something that is not easy to do in every case.
	Uh admit to you that it sometimes require uh imposition of inconveniences upon the American public.
	Um and we all experience that every time that we travel, say through one of our airports.
	But again, everything that we do, we do with the mind of of uh providing maximum security to the American public.
	Well, I'll tell you what, uh Mr. Gonzalez, Albert Alberto Gonzalez, the attorney general with us in the Bush administration.
	Um this is a great victory today for uh the forces uh trying to keep the uh country safe uh and and Britain in the same way.
	There isn't any question that what didn't happen is the news today, and what didn't happen is a bomb uh and uh and uh and a potential uh amount of death that would uh rival if not exceed nine eleven, and on that score, uh we have nothing but congratulations for everybody involved.
	I appreciate that, Mr. Mayor.
	Of course, uh, you know, we I think we've disrupted the threat.
	Uh we still don't know everything that uh I think uh can be known, and so uh, you know, I think it may be too early to say we we've ended the threat.
	So we continue to to do our investigation, both here in the United States and I know in Great Britain, and uh you know, we'll continue to do our best to make America as safe as possible.
	Uh on in that regard, uh uh Mr. Attorney General, I'll tell you on behalf of this entire listening audience, uh go get them and uh and and get them good.
	Uh okay, we'll do that.
	Thanks for being with us on the Rush program, I appreciate it.
	You bet.
	All right, Alberto Gonzalez there, the Attorney General of the United States.
	On the Rush Limbaugh program, Roger Hedgecock sitting in for Russia be back right after this.
	Roger Hedgecock in for Rush Limbaugh, and I won I was gonna ask uh I I gotta I gotta tell you I did chicken out.
	I was gonna ask Alberto Gonzalez.
	So, how are you gonna handle the anger from the New York Times at not getting a leak that this bust was coming so they could warn the terrorists ahead of time?
	How are you gonna handle the anger?
	The backlash, the editorial condemnation.
	Uh too political to ask the attorney general that.
	But uh but it is interesting because tomorrow now, which headline do you expect from the New York Times?
	Forty-eight hours after the crushing Defeat of his war policy at the hands of Connecticut voters.
	George Bush conjured up a so-called rumored threat to airlines in the UK.
	Or George Bush policy of deterring terrorism in conjunction with our partner, the uh United Kingdom, worked again to keep the terrorists from killing any more Americans.
	Which approach do you actually think the mainstream media will take?
	I've done a little survey uh here during the break, uh very short break, as you know, uh here on the Rush Limbaugh program, but I did take a little uh look at uh the news uh as to whether or not there's been any thank yous yet.
	Any accolades, any uh break in to say uh thank you for uh saving us from being blown up over the Atlantic uh by these um by these uh folks.
	Uh not yet.
	Okay, okay, I'm I'm optimistic.
	Maybe by the end of the show.
	Here's John in Gainesville, Florida, in the meantime.
	John, welcome to the Rush Program.
	Hey, Roger, greetings from the home of the world champion, Florida Gators.
	Yes, sir.
	Um I'm gonna go ahead and get right into it.
	You know, this you had this guy on earlier talking about, you know, uh intellectual idiots, but you know, you can obviously tell that it's it's people like him that is an intellectual idiot because liberals all agree that we are in a world uh in a war on terror, but the liberals disagree on how to fight the war on terror.
	And the Iraq war was not part of that war on terror.
	In fact, if anything, that war has made us much weaker.
	Because you have over there uh quagmire in which we're getting nowhere.
	The status quo is not helping us, and we did not foil this terrorist plot this morning through the Iraq war.
	We did it through three things that the that the Liberals agree on that are able to fight the war on terror, and that is diplomacy, intelligence, and freedom from foreign oil.
	So I don't understand how you think that all of this military might, you know, unleashing America's military might in the country is going to go ahead and win us the war on terror.
	Well, as I say, as I say it, I think you'd agree with me on this one, John.
	The uh the voter in the United States is going to have in the next two election cycles a stark choice, a contrast between the two parties and the approaches.
	You've just articulated one.
	I think you'll hear another one articulated from the conservative side.
	But let me try to pull this together a little bit.
	We're there now in Iraq, and this is the same question asked of Ned Lamont.
	What would you do now?
	I mean, I know you want to refight why we got there, but let's talk about today.
	What would you do from today?
	Well, I think we have two choices.
	I think one, we either pull out and have Jack Merth's plan where we're uh just uh uh uh uh over the horizon, or we add three hundred thousand troops and stabilize the country.
	I think both parties at this point can finally agree that we are not getting anywhere in Iraq with the status quo.
	Yeah.
	If you were president and had a magic wand, John, if you were president and had a magic wand, which of those two choices would you take?
	Unfortunately, I would have to choose to pull out only because if you added three hundred thousand troops, basically what you're doing is showing Iran that, hey, you know, you're making a show of force and that Iran's gonna come and think that you're that they're about to get invaded, and then all of a sudden you have you know them speeding up their nuclear program, which then we have to attack Iran, which then you won't be able to go to the supermarket without worrying about a suicide bomber right next to you.
	The United States creates the extremists and the attacks and the terrorists by attacking them.
	I certainly think that's the case, yes.
	And I think a lot of metrics will agree as well.
	Did the Israelis create Hezbollah?
	The Israelis, I don't know if they created Hezbollah, they created the uh the aggression towards them.
	Now, whether that aggression is is is right or not is let me see if I understand that.
	Uh we just have a couple of minutes, so let me just see if I can understand that, John.
	The Israelis then caused the Hezbollah to start the war.
	I don't know the history of the all I know is that the both sides are well just a month ago.
	I I I know it was a long time ago, but j just about a month ago, Hezbollah captured one of the Israeli soldiers and began rocket attacks on Israel.
	If you remember that far back, uh they started the war, but now uh you're saying that Israel actually caused them to start the war?
	No, no, not this most recent war, and I'm sure that's not the case.
	I mean, I'm sure it goes back hundreds of years.
	I don't know the history of the Israeli uh uh uh Arabic conflict.
	What I didn't think about.
	Well, they were Israel was a state founded in 1947.
	Okay.
	But that's not that's not what I called to talk about.
	I talked I called to talk about what's going on in Iraq and the difference between what how the terror and how the Republicans want to fight the war on terror.
	I'm trying to understand how we get less terrorism by pulling out of Iraq and giving the terrorists a victory.
	Giving the terrorists a victory, what you'll be doing is saving the uh saving America from getting any more into deeper quagmark and making things worse off than when we went in in the first place.
	I mean, I think we can both agree that we did not foil that plot this morning because of the Iraq war.
	That was done through the war on terror, through intelligence, through diplomacy with our allies, through back channels, through CIA, through MI6, not because of the war on Iraq.
	All right.
	Now, John, I I appreciate what you've said because you've set us up nicely for the fact that the voter is going to have a very clear choice.
	Uh retreat from Iraq is good for America.
	Uh victory in Iraq is the only good for America.
	Those are the two choices you're basically going to get.
	We're gonna Your premise says that that if we stay in Iraq and steal the course, we're eventually going to win.
	But there's no there's nothing to say that we will.
	You have Senator McCain saying we're playing whack-mole, you have Senator General saying he's the violence is the worst he's ever seen.
	I I love it, uh, John, because it's a question of are the Iraqis governing themselves?
	Are they messy in that government?
	Sure.
	They're just getting started.
	Are they having a lot of problems?
	Sure, they're just getting started.
	Are there many parts of Iraq that are doing very well, like Kurdistan?
	Absolutely.
	Are you going to read about it in the New York Times?
	Never.
	Uh John, in other words, you think we're being defeated in Iraq.
	The Iraqis don't agree.
	Uh Zarkawi didn't agree.
	The insurgency is constantly concerned that they're losing out there.
	That's the problem.
	Roger Hedgecock, back with more after this.
	Sadly out of time uh here.
	Uh all kinds of things I didn't get to today, but I'll have a chance to do it tomorrow.
	You will too on the Rush Limbaugh program.
	I'll be filling in uh for uh Rush tomorrow.
	What look at this article I missed.
	Western values are causing mental illness in Japan.
	How can I have not done that one?
	Well, okay, we'll get some time tomorrow.
	I'm Roger Hedgecock.
	Thanks for listening to the Rush Limbaugh program.

▲