Neal Boortz
Friday, June 7, 2002

With every passing day I become more and more convinced that the war against terrorism cannot be won. It cannot be won by the United States as long as political correctness rules over common sense.

I have four newspaper articles, editorials and columns spread out on my desk as I write this. Let's take a quick look:

This is an article about the FBI agent who blew the whistle on FBI mismanagement of clues and evidence that something was cooking … something that reached well done on Sept. 11. Rowley testified yesterday that a "climate of fear" impeded FBI terrorism investigations.

Fear of what? Fear of a career-ending mistake, that's what. And just what type of a mistake would that be? Well, profiling, for one. The agents knew that profiling was a political and investigative no-no ... so they were unwilling to go forward with a thorough investigation of the actions of Zacarias Moussaoui in Minnesota.

This is a Washington Times editorial. The editorial quotes someone named Ziad Asali, the director of some group called the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee. Asali says, "A new and disturbing trend is occurring at American airports, the practice of removing passengers because of their perceived ethnicity. This phenomenon must stop."

Hey, Ziad, old buddy, old pal. Let me tell you of a phenomenon that needs to stop. The phenomenon of Arab men bragging about how many innocent Americans they are going to kill. How about working on that one for a while.

Wesley Pruden wrote this opinion piece. He writes of FBI Director Mueller's insistence that the FBI "is against, has been and will be against any form of profiling." This article also details the attempts of the U.S. Senate's foremost icon of political correctness, the insipid Fuss Feingold from Wisconsin, to wrest an admission from Mueller that the FBI would not even consider profiling.

In the matter of the memo from the Phoenix FBI agent who was suspicious of those Arabs taking flying lessons, Feingold said to Mueller "I was hoping for you to say that, clearly, what was needed there was not some sort of an exception from a rule against racial profiling."

Just read the first paragraph of this article. That's all you need. Here it is:

Fears of racial profiling did impede the FBI's terrorism investigation of Arab men, Director Robert S. Mueller III testified yesterday, even as he pledged that his agents will not engage in the practice.

Have you ever read anything so patently absurd? So stupid? So ridiculous?

Who are those people making threats of terrorism? First of all, they are men. OK so far? To narrow it down a bit more … they are Arab men. Do you hear that? Do you hear how politically incorrect I'm being? These are ARAB MEN who are threatening you, your wife, your children, your parents and your friends. ARAB MEN.

So … as Wesley Pruden puts it, Sen. Russ Feingold tells us that it is wrong to "look among Arab men for suspected Arab men"?

Wars aren't just fought with bombs and bullets. It could be said that our most potent weapon is our brain. Our intelligence. If you refuse to use your human intelligence to identify your enemy, how in the hell can you expect to win the war?

You know what this is like? Your neighbor has a problem with fire ants. He can't even go into his yard because of the fire ants. So, what does he do? He puts up some flypaper. You ask him why he isn't using fire ant poison. He tells you he doesn't want to profile.

How stupid can we get?

Bush's New Cabinet Department

Oh, what a grand new agency this is going to be! The Department of Homeland Security! We're told that this new Cabinet-level department will combine "dozens" of federal agencies under one umbrella. Included … the INS, the Secret Service, FEMA, the Border Patrol, and the Coast Guard. Not known … whether or not the new HUGE Transportation Security Agency will be there too.

Now Bush says that this will end duplication and overlap. He says we will spend less on "overhead" and more on protecting America. Well, let me tell you how this is going to work out. Remember, this is government creating a new agency, not a profit-seeking private business consolidating operations.

We will spend more. Much more. There will be more government employees. Many more. Remember, additional government employees = additional job security for elected officials. Government union officials are licking their jowls.

Let's keep an eye on West Virginia Democratic Senator Robert Byrd. How many days will pass before he insists that the DHS offices be located in West Virginia?

The Democrats are jubilant. They've wanted to get this homeland security business away from Bush for a while now. Sen. Snagglepuss was on the tube yesterday afternoon casting Bush's decision as a victory for the Democratic Party. As one particularly insipid leftist put it … "Victory in the 'Free Tom Ridge' Movement.

My guess? We're going to spend more for less. I don't see anything here that is going to actually make us safer. After all, PC still reigns. You didn't hear Bush address THAT, did you?

Support for Lou Dobbs!

CNN's Lou Dobbs is on the hot seat. The "Drudge Report" tells us that CNN suits are torqued after a little sermonette by Dobbs on the air yesterday afternoon. Here, according to Drudge, is what Dobbs said:

The government and media for the past nine months have called this a war against terror. So have we here. But terror is not the enemy. It is what the enemy wants to achieve. So on this broadcast, we are making a change ... in the interests of clarity and honesty. The enemies in this war are radical Islamists who argue all non-believers in their faith must be killed. They are called Islamists. That's why we are abandoning the phrase "War Against Terror." Let us be clear. This is not a war against Muslims or Islam. It is a war against Islamists and all who support them. If ever there were a time for clarity, it is now. We hope our new policy is a step in that direction."

Tell me. Just where did Dobbs go wrong? Where is the error of his thinking? Admit it – he's right. It may not be politically correct, but he hit the Islamist nail on the head.

Terror isn't the enemy. It's the enemy's tool. What in the world could be wrong with identifying the enemy? And just who are our enemies? Islamists.

Islamists are not only our enemies, they seem to be the enemy of peace and tranquility pretty much around the world. How many hot, shooting conflicts are there worldwide now? Around 138 or so. And how many involve Muslims? All but about two or three.

There is a strain of radical Islam out there – the Islamists – who are plundering and murdering around the world. Identify them for who they are, not what they do.

The Islamists have no problem identifying Jews, Americans and Christians as the targets of their bloody assaults … and we're supposed to smother ourselves in oppressive political correctness and not identify those who want to kill us?

What if we had had to bow to this same idiotic political correctness 60 years ago? Would we be allowed to refer to the Japanese or Germans as our foes? Could you imagine what would have happened to anyone using the word "Japs"?

Shout them down. Every time someone starts this PC nonsense, just shout them down: "People are dying, you moron! They're killing us, and you want to sit around arguing about terminology? Go home and hide until the war is over, then stick your scrawny leftist neck out here again and start preaching your PC doctrine. Right now we have lives to save."

Just Where Does This End??

Hey – George W. Bush isn't the only one out there pushing for expanded government right now. How about Republican congressman Tom Osborne from Nebraska? There he is, a Republican, calling for more federal regulation.

Could somewhere please tell me just where I got this stupid idea that Republicans are the champions of LESS government?

So ... what is this big-government Republican after? Well, he used to be a football coach, and he's upset that some agents might be taking advantage of football players. So ... he wants some federal regulations. He wants the Imperial Federal Government of the United States to step in and regulate sports agents. This "Republican" is supporting a bill from Democrat Bart Gordon of Tennessee that would, among other things, require athletes to notify schools when they sign with an agent.

OK … this may sound a little farfetched, but if they want a federal law now requiring certain notifications when an athlete signs with an agent, why not a requirement that you notify certain agencies when you list your house for sale with a real estate agent? Then we could get a bill out there that would require you to notify the IRS when you hire a stockbroker or a financial adviser.

Here comes that same old question again. Just where in our Constitution does it give the federal government the authority to regulate the relationship between an athlete, or any professional for that matter, with their agent? The answer, of course, is that there is absolutely NO provision ANYWHERE in the Constitution that authorizes this legislation.

That doesn't matter, though. Just when, after all, was the last time you heard a legislator say, "Hey, I can't support this legislation. I find no constitutional authorization for this law."

Bottom line. Most congressmen and senators – all but about two – see no limits to the grand schemes and dreams they have for an ever-larger federal government.

And you wonder why I vote Libertarian.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
Bush Administration
Homeland/Civil Defense
War on Terrorism

A product that might interest you:
Revealed: The Terrorists Living Among Us