RFFM.ORG

9/11 Remembrances

9/11 -- WE HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN + WE MUST ALWAYS REMEMBER

Every generation can recall an event that is collectively seared into the mind of a nation and its people.  From the attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941 to the assassination of John F. Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963 and now including that horrible day on Sept. 11, 2001, individuals can tell you where they were, what they were doing and the thoughts that were permanently etched into their minds on those days.  The most mundane recollections became riveting stories of the human experience, designed to be filed away in an emotional time capsule which will never be lost. 

In 2006, RFFM.org commemorated the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 tragedy by interviewing five members of the local and national media.  Chicago area journalists shared their recollections of 9/11 five years after the devastating attacks which took the lives of thousands of innocent men, women and children in New York, Washington, D.C. and in a rural field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Touching, riveting and emotional--these individuals expose their inner feelings about one more day that will live in American infamy. Read the thoughts of Charlie Wojciechowski--NBC 5 Chicago; Phil Ponce--host, Chicago Tonight WTTW (PBS); Chuck Goudie--ABC 7 Chicago; Mike Flannery--CBS 2 Chicago; and Michael J. Waters--publisher and editor, Daily Southtown (now called the Southtown Star).

RFFM.org thought it appropriate to once again post these poignant recollections of a day that truly will never be forgotten.

 

********************** 

Charlie Wojciechowski, reporter, NBC 5 Chicago 
 
It was the first thing I saw when I switched on the TV that morning, live video of the second plane exploding as it sliced into the World Trade Center.  Matt Lauer and Katie Couric had been talking about what had, at first, seemed a terrible accident.  Then came the sinking feeling that it was not, and that the world would change forever.
 
Before I could reach for my toothbrush, the phone rang.  It was Angie Rosemond, my assignment editor.  In a calm and measured voice she told me to get to the Federal Building.  My crew would meet me there.  That started a day that none of us will ever forget.  The memories remain in the form of surreal images: standing with dozens of others as we watched the towers collapse on the monitors inside our live truck; waiting in a silent O'Hare parking lot, the staging area closest to then grounded airport; looking up at the Sears Tower, wondering if we would be next.
 
It was a frightening reality that to this day shapes thoughts, opinions and reactions to world events and one that is seared into our collective memory.
 
********************** 
 
Phil Ponce, Host, “Chicago Tonight” WTTW -- Channel 11

I woke up that morning to follow my usual routine of having a cup of coffee at the kitchen table while reading the morning papers.  Normally I never watch morning television while reading.  For some reason, though, I turned on “Good Morning America.”  I recall that Charles Gibson and Diane Sawyer were anchoring.  A few minutes after I tuned in, one of them interjected that there was a report that a small plane had crashed into one of the towers at the World Trade Center and that they would have more information as it became available.

Soon afterwards, they had a live picture of the towers and while information about the first incident was coming in, I saw the second plane go into the second tower as it happened in real time.  I could barely believe what I had just seen on my little counter-top TV set and at first it almost didn’t register.  Then Charlie Gibson said something like, “We’re under attack.”  That’s when it clicked.  I felt like someone had kicked me in the stomach.  And when the towers fell, I felt a mixture of revulsion, grief and anger.

At some point during all this I got a phone call from one of our producers.  She was the first one I talked to (my wife was out of town).  I was glad the producer called.  I needed another human being to connect with—even if it was just on the phone.  Later there were more phone calls; from other colleagues about how to fashion a program that night.  And my children called from college needing to process the events with their parents.  They had questions.  Why would somebody do this?  Are we safe?  Where was God in all this?  Good questions then.  Good questions now.

********************** 
 
Chuck Goudie, reporter, ABC 7 Chicago 
 
The American flags did it for me.  There were hundreds of them hung from expressway overpasses, gas stations, truck windows and car antennas within hours of the attack. It was reflex for so many people after their turf was attacked. Hang the red white and blue.

Producer Ann Pistone, cameraman Steve Erwin and I lost count of how many flags we saw on the interstate between Chicago and Manhattan that devastating day. We had left the Loop a few hours after the assault, realizing there would be no flights to get us there. We drove all day and night watching the flags fly by. Some were strung up, others were in the hands of people who must have felt compelled to do something to express their heartache, dismay and helplessness.
 
Except for necessities we never stopped that day, aiming at ground zero as if it was the end of a tunnel. The corridor of flags gave me personal comfort and certainty that day, that despite the darkness, there was light and strength. Even while standing at ground zero a few hours later, breathing the remains of the world trade center, the American flags that guided our way to lower Manhattan made it clear that we as a nation would survive.

Five years later, it seems most of the flags have been packed away...until the next time.
 
********************** 
 
Mike Flannery, reporter, CBS 2 Chicago 
 
I remember remarking on the beautiful morning sunshine as I walked into a barber shop.  Otto had opened early to accommodate my need for a pre-work appointment.  We were the only ones in the shop.  He put some classical music on the sound system, made us some coffee and went to work trimming and clipping.  At some point, the telephone rang.  It was Otto’s wife.
 
Without putting the phone down, and without saying anything to me, he hurried over to turn on a TV.  We saw a live picture of both towers burning, then the broadcast cut away to replay video tape of a large passenger jet slamming into the second building. Otto said something in German to his wife, hung up, then slumped into a chair.  We sat in stunned silence.
 
I was having trouble wrapping my mind around what I was watching.  This was an act of evil mass-murder, conceived and executed by some very smart people. My first suspects:  “Death-to-America” Islamists, never mind that I’d been wrong in the same surmise after the Oklahoma City bombing.
 
I called the office as I raced the 4-5 blocks to get there.  They were already deploying reporters and camera crews, though it was unclear when we would ever get on the air, since CBS was going wall-to-wall with reports from New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.  I was sent to the Sears Tower, in time to see nervous workers heading home, perhaps a dozen stopping to ask me if what they’d heard was true … that another hijacked plane was still aloft and headed for the Loop.  I said what I knew: we could not determine the source of that rumor and government officials told us they thought it was untrue.
 
In a short time, no planes of any kind were visible.  The empty sky above the Loop’s almost empty-streets was eerie.  The eventual appearance of military fighter jets flying CAP (Combat Air Patrol) made it even eerier.
 
********************** 
 
Michael J. Waters, publisher and editor, Daily Southtown 
 
I was driving to the newspaper office when I tuned in WBBM Newsradio.  The live feeds from New York reported a shocking story -- that two planes had crashed into the World Trade Center towers in what appeared to be deliberate acts.  I was desperate to get to work to get the newsroom rolling on the story; the 30-minute drive seemed to take forever.
 
I was the first editor in the newsroom that morning.  I started calling reporters and other editors on their cell phones to either urge them to get into the office as quickly as possible or get them into the field at locations such as the Sears Tower.  Employees from throughout the building--including our advertising, circulation and accounting departments--gathered in clusters in stunned silence around the TVs mounted on the newsroom walls to watch the news reports.  Some wiped away tears as they watched the shocking images of the crumbling towers.
 
As more editors arrived to help coordinate our coverage, we quickly decided that we wanted to put out an extra edition.  It wasn't difficult to convince our publisher that this story was important enough to justify the Daily Southtown's first extra since the death of (Chicago Mayor) Harold Washington 14 years earlier.  The next few hours were a blur as the newsroom compiled the report and we scrambled to get the extra printed and distributed.
 
It wasn't until late that night, when the Sept. 12 newspaper had been put to bed, that the emotions of the day started to hit me.  We'd spent all day trying to help our readers make sense of what happened and why.  Now, in the quiet of the newsroom after deadline, we had a chance to reflect on those questions ourselves.  I think we understood even then that we'd never really be able to make sense of what happened.  And we already knew that our country would never be quite the same.
 
**********************
 
RFFM.org would like to express its appreciation to the members of the media who took time to contribute to this project.  They took time out of hectic schedules to add to the historical record.  Their words will be sent to the Library of Congress and will become a permanent record, documenting their 9/11 experiences.

RFFM.org encourages its readers to post their recollections of 9/11 in the comment section. 
 
Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact: Dan@rffm.org  

Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected. No hyperlinks allowed.

Bush Victim of 9/11 and Katrina: He Should Not Take the Blame for Acts of God and Devil

Commentary by Daniel T. Zanoza, Executive Director

 

 

 

According to some political operatives and willing members of the dominant media, the nation has a President who is extraordinarily inept.  Yet other critics say George W. Bush is evil beyond description.  But conventional wisdom among the President's detractors implies Bush is both of these things, inept and evil, to a point never before seen in world history.  According to the far left, Bush, a bumbling fool, is one of the great evil masterminds of our times.  However, no one has ever accused liberals of basing their views on logic or truth.

 

If this sounds extreme, it is.  To those who hate the President of the United States with a burning passion, Bush is both a fool and a genius.  I guess he's a foolish genius and this perception rings true among millions of American left-wingers.

 

Now why am I saying the left is calling Bush an idiot and an evil mastermind?  Well, read on.  Concerning the Katrina disaster and the tragedy of Sept. 11th, 2001, it is clear some believe one man is responsible for both events and that man is George Bush.  Many, including the press, have blamed the President for the suffering which followed one of the most devastating hurricanes to ever hit the shores of North America.

 

  And, on an even more ridiculous note, there are a considerable number of mentally-challenged partisans who believe George Bush actually plotted the evil which took place on 9/11.  Of course, even mentioning such allegations gives these irresponsible notions undeserved credibility.  Therefore, this conspiracy theory contrived in lunacy will not get further mention in this column.  Incredibly, there is even a website devoted to this madness.

 

To take the incredible Bush-bashing even further, the President of the United States was blamed for an act of God which some scientists say occurs only once in a century.  Katrina decimated the Gulf Coast and caused damage totaling in the hundreds of billions of dollars.  Charges were levied, claiming federal organizations designed to meet disasters were unprepared and not up to the task at hand.

 

However, it is clear Katrina was a task no one was or could have been prepared for.  Yet "gotcha" politics and a press driven by conflict felt it was necessary to place blame--so it did.

 

  The truth of the matter is:  New Orleans, a city with a Democratic Mayor, located in a state run by a Democratic Governor, was lagging behind neighboring states in preparation for Katrina and is still lagging behind its Gulf Coast neighbors as far as recovery.  For example, years ago, Mississippi officials proudly proclaimed that state had been cleared of the debris which resulted from Katrina's onslaught.  Yet New Orleans still is dealing with tons of rubble and progress is being made ever so slowly.  The New Orleans recovery project has been stifled by a racially insensitive Mayor who told his constituents New Orleans should be a chocolate city and a former Democratic Governor who fought with the New Orleans Mayor before, during and after the Hurricane struck.  Yet Americans are surprised Louisiana's response to Katrina has been so woeful in many ways.  From rampant fraud to marauding policemen to criminal acts of inhumanity, it was all there for the world to see.  But, somehow, it was all Bush's fault.

 

Hurricane Katrina was indeed the perfect storm of ineptitude and the federal government was, in some miraculous way, supposed to sweep in and right the wrongs politicians took decades to construct. 

 

Did FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) perform like a well-oiled machine right after the Hurricane departed the Gulf Coast region?  Certainly not.  But it is a safe bet to say no organization could have been prepared for a natural disaster of that magnitude.  Or maybe, just maybe, building a city on an estuary at the mouth of one of the world's major rivers isn't exactly a good idea.  However, we have made history.  According to some, George Bush is responsible for Katrina--which was an act of God; and 9/11--which was an act inspired by the Devil himself.  That's quite a résumé for a man who some say is the closest thing to a functioning illiterate.

 

Captions for photos:

Top:  President George W. Bush

Middle:  Second plane about to strike World Trade Center

Bottom:  Flooding after Hurricane Katrina hits New Orleans

 

* A version of this column was first posted in October 2006.

 

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact Dan@rffm.org  

Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected. No hyperlinks allowed.

In WWII it was called treason: Today it's called freedom of the press

Commentary by Daniel Zanoza

For a moment, let's flashback to a hypothetical conversation being held on May 15, 1944.  We break in on a phone conference between the Roosevelt administration and a managing editor of the New York Times.  The White House is pleading with the nation's so-called "newspaper of record" not to publish some information leaked to the publication regarding the June 5th 1944 planned invasion of Hitler's Fortress Europe/Normandy.  The White House representative contends releasing the story will cost the lives of thousands of Allied soldiers.  The managing editor of the New York Times responds by saying, it's in the best interest of the public to know and on June 1st publishes the top secret story.  The invasion does not take place on June 5th because of bad weather in the English Channel and instead goes forward on June 6th.  As a result of the New York Times piece, American troops and their allies are thrown back into the sea and Hitler's death machine on the European Continent is allowed to continue for many years into the future.  As a result, instead of six million Jews being killed in places like Auschwitz, the final number totals 10 million.  Also, as many as eight million others, who languish in Nazi concentration camps, see their demise.  Add to this, the expanded numbers of Allied troops who will die because of the war's extension.  Millions of civilians will also perish because the war has been prolonged.  Remember, this all occurs because the New York Times contended Americans had the right to know about the secret plans concerning the United States war against fascism.
 
Of course, such a scenario would have never taken place in 1944 America.  The Roosevelt administration would not have pleaded with any publication regarding the release of top secret military plans to defeat the nation's enemy.  The New York Times building would have been closed down, their files would have been confiscated and the offices would have been surrounded by military police--while the newspaper's publishers would have been facing charges of treason.
 
Let's fast forward to the present.  The United States is in a life and death struggle with a group of fanatics who desire to kill everyone in the world who do not share their religious beliefs.  Their targets include men, women and children.  These terrorists receive funding through a worldwide banking system which makes available millions of dollars to accomplish their goals at the touch of a keyboard.
 
Such was the case concerning a classified program initiated by the U.S. Treasury Department which prevented groups like Al Qaeda for profiting from such transactions.  The intelligence program was successful.  Select members of both political parties were aware of the strategy and the program broke no laws.  However, after considering the pleadings of the Bush administration, the New York Times decided to run with the story which detailed the secret and highly successful operation.  Hence, the covert and legal tool which lead to the arrest of at least one major Al Qaeda operative and numerous other players in the terrorist organization is no longer secret.  Bill Keller, the executive editor of the New York Times, conveniently hides behind the alleged "public's best interest," argument to justify his newspaper's publication of the article.  However, common sense makes one wonder how such a story can be considered in the public's best interest, if it jeopardizes the lives of the people it is meant to inform.
 
Thankfully, there is sanity in our country today.  U.S. Rep. Peter King (R-NY) is calling for an investigation of the New York Times, citing the nation's security was impacted by the newspaper's actions.  The New York Times could be prosecuted under the 1917 Espionage Act, according to some legal experts.  "The New York Times are recidivists," said King, in reference to another New York Times story which revealed a National Security Agency (NSA) program that monitored phone calls made in the U.S. to possible terrorists overseas.  After the New York Times brought that classified program to the public's attention, it must be noted that nearly every member of Congress who reviewed the NSA initiative said it was an invaluable tool in America's war against terror.  Both Democrats and Republicans acknowledged the need for this type of intelligence-gathering and said the civil rights of the public were not in jeopardy due to its implementation.
 
But, once again, the New York Times felt it was necessary to inform the enemy of the methods being used by the United States government to fight them.
 
Indeed, during the inspection of the fortified dwelling, where Abu Musab al-Zarqawi met his doom at the end of two 500 pound laser-guided bombs dropped from above, a copy of Newsweek was found among the wreckage, close to al-Zarqawi's near lifeless body.  It has been reported the infamous terrorist had highlighted a column by Newsweek's Jonathan Alter.  It is apparent terrorists are planning their insurgency by reading reports and columns published in the West.  Amazingly, one of Newsweek's editors went so far as to criticize Alter on Don Imus' Morning Show (cable, MSNBC) who shamelessly was taking pride in the fact ruthless killers were reading his work while planning their insurgent mayhem.
 
It's safe to say if some politicians on the radical left and members of the media were allowed to act with no regard for America's security, the United States may have lost World War II.  It's also safe to assume if this kind of irresponsible journalism continues, the civilized world may lose the war against terror as well.  It's a sad day when individuals put journalism ahead of the welfare of their country and its citizens, especially when that country provides the journalistic freedom many members of the media enjoy while being protected by the Constitution.  Do they understand these rights would be only a dream, if the U.S. were to be defeated by the radical elements that wage war against us today?  To state the unthinkable, we may well lose the war against terror, but, in this case, it will not be the enemy's abroad who will defeat us.

Editor's note:  This column was first published June 27, 2006 

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact Dan@rffm.org

Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected.  No hyperlinks allowed.

Hitler Fascism + Radical Islam Share Common Goal: Destruction of Jews

Commentary by Daniel Zanoza

Many on the left believe there is no such thing as evil.  Or, if they do believe in the concept, they see it in secular terms, meaning some people or groups think outside the lines of accepted behavior.  These humanists adhere to the philosophy of moral relativism and situational ethics which advances the idea evil is in the mind of the beholder.  In other words, what may be evil to one individual may not be evil to another.  Also, many on the left believe certain situations demand certain actions and those actions are justified.  Hence, the phrase, "The ends justify the means."

Most historians agree western civilization adheres to the Judeo-Christian ethos.  This means evil is something that's very real.  It can influence men, it can impact the way men think.  Evil is a palpable force, rooted in malevolence, bent upon the destruction of mankind.

Some who have experienced real evil agree with those who think of the concept in theological terms.  For example, people have felt the presence of real evil in the concentration camps of Nazi Germany and the killing fields of Cambodia.  Individuals have also encountered evil on a one on one basis, like those who have survived encounters with serial killers.  Survivors of such events tell stories that cannot be supported by the notion that evil is a subjective term.  They have seen its effects up close and personal.  They have looked the devil in the eye and know of his reality.

If one believes this interpretation of evil is true, we can look upon history from a different perspective.  Hitler believed the Jews were at the root of the world's problems and they caused Germany's disgrace at the end of World War I.  Hitler also believed Jews had to be eliminated from Europe, in order for Germany and the European continent to prosper and take its rightful place upon the world stage.  There are those who see the Nazis' mission in more religious terms.  The Jews were God's chosen people, according to the Old Testament.  If Hitler was truly evil and represented the devil incarnate, as I and many others believe, wiping out the Jews would have certainly been one of his priorities.  In fact, during some of the most important battles of World War II, Hitler often diverted material and troops away from the military, in order to carry out what he saw as "The Final Solution" which was the total annihilation of the Jewish race.  This mission took precedent over world conquest, in Hitler's warped mind.  Subsequently, one could say his mission was driven by evil to the point beyond human reason.  It was driven by evil beyond the reasoning of the people who surrounded him as well.  Indeed, those who were there at the time say Hitler had a charismatic aura that could not be described in human terms.  Yet if his plans were irrational and counterproductive to the welfare of the state, why did many continue to follow this madman until his--and their--demise?  They followed Hitler to the death of their nation as well.

The same analogy can be drawn today between Hitler's warped goals and the agenda of radical Islam.  Political correctness continually tells the world, Islamic extremists represent a small fraction of those who practice that faith.  Yet with every terrorist bombing and after every beheading of an innocent individual, this rationalization is beginning to lose its credibility with many the world over.  Of course, this is not to say every believer in Islam agrees with the agenda of Islamic extremists.  Also, it must be said members of all faiths can come under dark influences, history has told that story very well.  However, some on the left say terrorists are justified in the killing of innocent people.  They call them "freedom fighters" and compare them with America's Founding Fathers.  Radical thinkers, like Ward Churchill, a professor at the University of Colorado, claim the victims on 9/11 deserved their fate.  In fact, Churchill referred to those killed in the World Trade Center as "little Eichmann's" whose deaths were, in a way, justified because of America's international policies.  Adolf Eichmann was the architect of Hitler's "Final Solution" regarding the extermination of the Jews.

But, like Hitler, radical Islam seems to share the same goal:  The destruction of the Jewish race.  Islamic fanatics will tell you they simply want a Palestinian state, but at the same time, many proudly proclaim their goal is the destruction of Israel and its people.

In many terrorist incidents perpetrated by radical Islam, Jews have been singled out for attack.  From the terrorist assault during the 1972 Olympics in Munich, Germany, to the case of the Achile Lauro pleasure cruise in 1985 where 69 year-old wheel-chair bound Leon Klinghoffer was cast into the sea, Jews were actively pursued and murdered.  In no way could this have led to the creation of a Palestinian state.  These actions were evil.  They were not the acts of "freedom fighters" or revolutionaries.  These men had one goal and that was to kill as many Jews as possible.

The similarities between Hitler fascism and radical Islam cannot be denied.  Political correctness cannot obscure it.  Multiculturalism cannot deny it.  Nationalist fervor cannot justify it.  Since Hagar and Ishmael were cast out by Abraham, as related in an Old Testament story, the enmity towards the Jewish people from the Arab race has been palpable.  Certainly those of the Islamic faith have not been the only perpetrators of evil against the Jews.  As previously stated, evil can and does find its way into all races and faiths.  But when there is a unified effort to destroy those who some believe are God's chosen people, the concept of good vs. evil cannot be dismissed as religious superstition.

Editor's note:  This column was first published July 16, 2006.

 

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact Dan@rffm.org   

Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected.  No hyperlinks allowed.

Chicago Mayor's Push for Casino Will Harken Back to Daley Sr.'s Mobbed-Up Past

COMMENTARY by DANIEL T. ZANOZA

The city of Chicago is one of the few major metropolitan areas which runs away from its past at every opportunity.  Yet, indeed, the very construction of the city led to the term "underworld."  And with rampant corruption controlled by infamous individuals like "Big Jim" Colosimo, Al Capone, Paul "The Waiter" Ricca, Murray "The Camel" Humphrey and Tony "Joe Batters" Accardo, Chicago can hardly bury its past--no pun intended.

 

Since the turn of the 20th century, what Carl Sandburg referred to as the "City of Big Shoulders" was perhaps the center of organized crime in the United States.  Though New York had its Syndicate and Detroit had the Purple Gang, many believe true power in America's underworld was concentrated in something called the Outfit.

 

After Capone left power, due to his conviction on tax evasion charges in the early 1930's, it was Ricca, Humphrey and Accardo who truly called the shots in what many refer to as the Mafia.  Even "Lucky" Luciano and Meyer Lansky, originators of organized crime in New York would not make a move without consulting the Chicago Triumvirate whose innovation and power criminologists say was matched by none.

 

Since the hay-days of mob activity in Chicago, the city has done everything possible to shed its dark past.  But its reputation lives on--despite the efforts of the current Mayor, Richard M. Daley.  In the early century, individuals like "Big Jim" Colismo controlled gambling and prostitution in the city.  With the advent of Prohibition, organized crime found its true calling through the sale of bootleg alcohol, combined with the pandering trade.  Added profits were topped off by a very lucrative illegal gambling racket.

 

After Capone's departure, the mob moved into the numbers game--which had made millions for underworld entrepreneurs in the African-American community.  Union corruption--which was master-minded by Murray "The Camel" Humphrey--brought great fortune to the Outfit as well.  Eventually, the mob moved into the illicit drug trade.  Until the early 1960's, the Chicago Outfit was ruled with an iron hand by Ricca, Humphrey and Accardo.  Though in later years, flamboyant underworld figures, such as Sam "Mooney" Giancano and lesser players, including Joseph "Joey Doves" Aiuppa, and the Spilotro Brothers of the movie "Casino" fame, controlled organized crime in Chicago, the FBI virtually wiped out mob activity in the city--although remnants of the Outfit still exist today.

 

Chop shops and vending machines (poker, cigarettes, etc.) are still reported to be controlled by criminal entities.  But the glory days of the Chicago Outfit are said to be long gone.  Yet the public doesn't have to look far to find reminders of those wild times gone by.

 

Indeed, Chicago's current Mayor Richard M. Daley may not hold that office if not for the influence the Outfit had when it came to the election of his father, Richard J. Daley.  Perhaps the Daley link with organized crime is one of the reasons why the city does all it can to obscure Chicago's dark and corrupt history.  You will not find city-sponsored tours of famous gangland hang-outs.  Even historical landmarks, like the site of the St. Valentine's Day massacre at 2122 North Clark Street, though an empty lot, are nagging reminders of a bygone era which City Fathers would rather forget.

 

That is why the current Mayor Daley probably did much soul-searching before he decided to make a bid for a casino that would be built on Navy Pier along the city's beautiful lakefront.  At first, Daley was against the construction of a gambling palace in the heart of the city.  Was it possible Daley felt such an establishment would be a reminder of those violent days when Chicago was a wide-open city?

 

Something changed in the early 1990's, as far as Daley's thinking regarding the expansion of legalized gambling.  Some say, when the city of Joliet, Illinois received a license for a riverboat casino, Daley saw the potential such added revenue would bring to his cash-strapped coffers.  Evidently, he felt reminders of organized crime's influence--which many believed played a significant role in the election of his Father--would be worth the price.  But Daley's push for a casino will certainly rekindle memories of how the Daley Empire got started.

 

The Outfit played a significant role in Richard J. Daley's coming to power.  Hizzoner "The Boss" was the protégé of 11th Ward Committeeman, Hugh "Babe" Connelly whose ties to the mob go way back to the days of the "Moustache Pete's" who included prominent underworld figures like Johnny Torrio who first brought Capone to Chicago.  Daley took over Connelly's 11th Ward seat in 1947.  In league with people like 11th Ward Alderman "Big Joe" McDonough, by 1955 the Mob was grooming Daley to be Mayor and, with the help of the Outfit, his election became a reality.  For example, in the very mobbed-up 1st Ward, Daley won a plurality of votes by a staggering margin of 13,275 to 1,961.  After his election, Daley moved to solidify the Outfit's power in the city.  In 1956, Daley disbanded "Scotland Yard" an intelligence unit which had compiled reams of detailed records about Chicago crime figures.  All this was to the grief of the Chicago Crime Commission who believed Daley's election had set the city back a decade--as far as the prosecution of organized crime.

 

Perhaps Richard M. Daley received much of his education from his Father whose political coffers were stuffed with mob cash, according to the FBI.  And perhaps the free rein given to organized crime by the Father implanted ideas in the mind of the son regarding possible revenue expansion through alternative sources.  It's possible today's Mayor of Chicago learned a very important lesson from Tony "Joe Batters" Accardo who secretly financed the Rivera Hotel in Las Vegas in 1955, the same year Richard J. Daley was elected Mayor.  For nearly a quarter of a century afterward, the Chicago mob skimmed literally hundreds of millions of dollars out of Las Vegas casinos--while operating with near impunity in Chicago, their home base.

 

Richie Daley had to see the unlimited amounts of cash that could be directed into city coffers through the expansion of gambling in Chicago.  And though most of what used to be underworld crime has been incorporated into white collar America, gambling becomes even more seductive, no matter what memories of Chicago's past may be dredged up in the process.

 

What exactly does Richie Daley dream about when he thinks of Chicago a decade from now?  Does he see a glamorous strip of hotels and casinos lining Michigan Avenue or State Street?  Does Daley envision the legalization of prostitution--as is the case in Nevada?  And has the son of "The Boss" made plans for the added crime which will surely accompany gambling to the city on Lake Michigan.

 

Much of what will happen regarding a possible casino in Chicago is in the hands of the Illinois General Assembly.  Conventional wisdom says if another casino license is awarded in Illinois, Daley has positioned himself to be first in line.  This is all well and good, but with the good dreams come the nightmares of organized crime and corruption.

 

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact:  Dan@rffm.org 

 

NOTE: Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected.  No hyperlinks allowed.

Part 3 Conspiracy Sunday: Flight 800 and Airbus Crash in New York, Examples of Possible Cover-Ups

For the Sake of Us All by Daniel T. Zanoza

It cannot be refuted or denied, but it can be ignored.  For whatever the reason, there have been times in American history where the U.S. government participated in the spreading of disinformation or lies.  For example, until this day, many believe both Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt knew the Japanese were about to attack Pearl Harbor.  Indeed, the conventional wisdom at the time was either Midway Island or Pearl Harbor, Hawaii would be targeted by the Japanese war machine.

It is important to remember most Americans believed the country should follow a policy of isolation.  It was a problem of the Europeans and the Orient.  Therefore, U.S. interests would be best served if we simply stayed out of a war that many felt was not our business.

Those who argue against the idea Roosevelt and Churchill knew we would come under attack at any moment from the Japanese, have little solid ground to stand on.  Indeed, American Armed Forces in the Pacific were told to expect an attack on either Midway or Pearl.  But after the day that will live in infamy, individuals like Admiral Husband E. Kimmel and General Walter Short were appointed to be the fall guys in the light of history.  But they were responsible for the December 7th 1941 disaster only if what happened on that day were scrutinized under a very dim light.

Roosevelt and Churchill might be given a pass for their actions which led to the deaths of nearly 3,000 Americans during the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor--if one truly believes, without this conspiracy, Japan and Germany might have grown so powerful they would have been unstoppable if America had not gone to war when it did.  Roosevelt believed, in the opinion of many, only such an attack would galvanize American support that would lead the country into World War II.

In contrast, events like the downing of TWA Flight 800 on July 17, 1996 and the crash of Airbus A300-600 in Queens, New York on November 12, 2001 may have been covered up for different reasons.  Imagine, it's almost two months to the day after two jetliners were purposely flown into the World Trade Center, causing one of the greatest disasters in American history.  It had to be another act of terrorism, didn't it?  Well, as I wrote in parts 1 and 2 of this series, the key to finding the truth about any event is to watch the media.  I'm not saying the mainstream press always reports the truth.  I simply know, if the media is shying away from something, there is a good chance there is a reason why.

The Airbus flight, which crashed into the Rockaway neighborhood in Queens, New York, seemed to be a sure act of terror to most Americans.  After all, how could it happen again in America's most populous city.  Was it a coincidence or had Osama Bin Laden struck again?  If you depended on information dispensed solely by the media, the possibility of terrorism was soon being downplayed.  In fact, there was little mention that the downing of Airbus Flight 587 out of JFK International Airport could have been a terrorist act.  The media ran from the subject and quickly featured eyewitnesses who said they saw the engine fall off of the plane shortly before its demise.  The eyewitness reports did not match what the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) ultimately claimed had occurred leading to the Airbus crash.  According to the NTSB, an experienced co-pilot erratically manipulated the aircraft's rudder.  These actions, allegedly, led to the failure of five bolts which helped to affix the vertical stabilizer to the aircraft and this, in turn, put too much stress on the plane's tail, causing it to fall off.

In essence, the government placed all the blame on one man, even though they admitted the co-pilot had gone through a similar situation before and was warned about inappropriately manipulating the Airbus rudder.

It was a nice, cozy, little package.  There was nothing to fix on similar airplanes.  If the co-pilot had acted in a different manner, Airbus Flight 587 would have never crashed into the Queens neighborhood.

However, there is another scenario which could have taken place on November 12th of 2001.  Is it possible terrorists may have, once again, entered the cockpit, taking over control of the Airbus?  Of course it is.  And could the plane have crashed because of an inexperienced pilot hell bent on destruction?  Or could this have been a Flight 93 type scenario where a cockpit struggle may have caused the Airbus to go into erratic flight, hence leading to the vertical stabilizer breaking free from the aircraft?  Again, the answer to this question is a resounding "yes!"  There were no witnesses left alive to tell us what happened on Airbus Flight 587.  Therefore, the sole possessors of information concerning what happened on that aircraft was the government.

On July 17, 1996, Flight 800 was cut in two by a devastating explosion over the Atlantic, after departing JFK.  This time literally hundreds of individuals swore they saw a ground to air missile strike the airliner which carried 230 passengers and crew.  Here the media could not disregard the possibility of a terrorist act.  Just too many witnesses.  But every time the mainstream media talked about the crash of Flight 800, the primary focus was on mechanical failure.  Next, the press paid some attention to the possibility a bomb brought the cross-Atlantic flight down to the sea and only begrudgingly did the media consider Flight 800 was a victim of a ground to air missile attack, intentional or otherwise.

I say otherwise because it soon became common knowledge a U.S. missile cruiser was in the area of the Flight 800 tragedy.  Was it possible an errant launch of an American missile took down Flight 800 or were the deaths of 230 people caused by terrorists who fired a missile at the aircraft from an offshore platform?

I quickly came to the conclusion, if it were anything but mechanical failure, the American public would never hear about it.  And even though traces of explosives were detected among the plane's wreckage, the crash supposedly was due to a spark near one of its fuel tanks.

Now, were all Boeing 747's grounded until the problem was corrected?  No.  Why weren't the planes grounded?  Was it because the FBI and the NTSB knew mechanical failure was not the cause for the crash of Flight 800?  From that date on, passengers were presumably told to roll the dice when boarding a Boeing 747 and, if they made it to their destination in one piece, it was a good day.

Why would the government cover-up these possible acts of terror?  The answer is simple.  Economics.  If Airbus Flight 587 were in fact another victim of a terrorist attack, Americans' trust in the aviation industry would have been totally destroyed.  After all, it is only during the last two years the number of those flying has reached pre 9/11 numbers.  If Airbus Flight 587 could be brought down by terrorists just months after the horrors of 9/11, it might have taken the commercial aviation industry many more years to recover, if at all.  The subsequent impact this would have had on America's economy would be incalculable.  Therefore, wouldn't keeping another terrorist attack on a commercial flight secret be a good thing in the minds of some?

The same can be said about Flight 800, but with one caveat.  What would have happened if Flight 800 had been the target of an errant sea to air missile fired from an American war ship?  The ramifications of this scenario would have been devastating to the military, the current administration and to the airline industry.  There is no way this information would have been released to the public.  Yet there is no way the Navy could say, "it couldn't happen." 

For a moment, let us harken back to July 3, 1988.  The U.S. Navy warship Vincennes mistakenly fired a missile at an Iranian commercial airliner, killing 290 innocent people in the Persian Gulf.  It was a terrible accident, but just the same, it happened.  However, this time, the U.S. Navy could not deny the incident, due to international attention.  Is this what happened on a steamy night in July of 1996?  We will probably never know.

Conspiracies take shape for many different reasons.  Some are enacted with good intentions in mind.  However, to say it all happened as the book said it did, is folly.

Part 1:  Could Conspiracies, Including the Kennedy Assassination and Others, Survive in Time of Internet?   http://rffm.typepad.com/republicans_for_fair_medi/2008/04/could-conspirac.html

Part 2:  Could They Have Killed Kennedy In The Age Of Internet Technology?  http://rffm.typepad.com/republicans_for_fair_medi/2008/05/part-2-conspira.html

NOTE: Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected.  No hyperlinks allowed.

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact:  Dan@rffm.org 

Part 2, Conspiracy Sunday: Could They Have Killed Kennedy In The Age Of Internet Technology? by Daniel T. Zanoza

 

After the verdict in the O.J. Simpson trial came in, Americans heard a new phrase.  The term "jury nullification" explained how a jury comprised mostly of African-Americans could let a black man go free, even though there was overwhelming evidence pointing to his guilt.  Imagine if there was a videotape of Simpson brutally slaying his wife Nicole and Ron Goldman.  Many believe, even with such evidence, the jury still would have found the former football star innocent of the murders.

The same can be said about the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.  Even though there was a film of Kennedy taking the killing shot, the American public was told not to believe their eyes.  It was similar to a mid-1960's movie starring Walter Matthau and Robert Morse, titled "A Guide for the Married Man".  Morse played a character who was adroit at cheating on his wife and he was teaching Matthau how to have an extramarital affair without getting caught.  One of the major lessons Matthau had to learn was; if ever found in a compromising position, do one simple thing...deny, deny, deny.

That has been the modus operandi for those who have defended the findings of the Warren Commission for over 45 years and they use a simple mantra to back up their logic.  They say, if there were a conspiracy, no one could have kept quiet for this long.  Could you call this "conspiracy nullification" or did they ascribe to the time-tested method of deny, deny, deny?  There have been many people who claimed Kennedy was a victim of a coup d'état on November 22, 1963.  The problem is no one has been willing to listen--besides over 70% of the American public.

But, for a moment, let's concentrate on the title of this series, "Could Conspiracies, Including the Kennedy Assassination and Others, Survive in Time of Internet?"  Therefore, pretend we have a time machine that allows us to go back to November 22, 1963.  The Internet has existed in some form since the 1980's.  Today many cell phones have the ability to take not only pictures, but have camcorders which allows users to record events as they unfold.  What would have happened, if this technology existed on that fateful day?

To begin, thousands of those in Dealey Plaza would have been recording what, to them, was a special moment in history, although they did not know just how special that moment was.  Then, shots suddenly ring out.  Mayhem rules the scene, as hundreds or even thousands pull out their cell phones and begin to record the events unfolding before them.

There are not only detailed pictures and videos of the presidential motorcade, but there are thousands of images possessed by witnesses which depict the scene from all different vantage points.  There are those who take pictures that can be digitally-enhanced of the Texas School Book Depository from top to bottom.  There are those whose cameras are focused on the presidential motorcade as Kennedy is first struck in the neck and then takes the fatal head shot.  There are photos of the hill and the fence which would be a perfect point of concealment for possible conspirators.

In this media-obsessed society, citizens run home and put their images on the Internet for the world to see.  Indeed, even if the FBI attempted to confiscate cameras, as they did on November 22, 1963, many have already transmitted their photos and videos to their home computers and those of friends to guarantee their safety.  In this world, possible conspirators may have been spotted behind the wooden fence which borders Dealey Plaza from the railroad yard which lies just beyond.  Another hundred witnesses may have caught a killer firing from a curbside drainage grade, where many believe the fatal shot, which virtually blew the 35th President's head apart, came from.  It would have been a situation conspirators could not have controlled.  However, the conspirators would have known this and, if our imaginary trip back through time were reality, Kennedy would not have been targeted in Dealey Plaza on that day.

But let's say the conspirators went through with their plot any way.  Before long, those who believed things weren't kosher would have been setting up blogs and web sites, questioning what happened to the President.  The chatter would have been at a din.  Journalists, like Bob Schieffer and Dan Rather would have been forced to address the possibility of a conspiracy, rather than dismissing it at hand.  Perhaps Oswald would have been seen in a completely different light.  Some may have found Oswald was indeed working covertly for the FBI or CIA in an attempt to uncover the plot against the President, as many suggest.

It is possible Oswald's relationship with individuals like the mysterious character David Ferrie would have become public knowledge.  Questions would have been asked about how an individual, who supposedly defected to Russia, could be moving freely around Dallas and, in fact, working in a building which just happened to lie along the route of Kennedy's motorcade.  Information may have surfaced regarding the fact Oswald spoke nearly-fluent Russian to the point where Marina, his wife, upon first meeting him did not recognize he was an American.

Gun enthusiasts would have gotten into the act as well.  They quickly would have researched what was allegedly the killing weapon--an antiquated Mannlicher-Carcano rifle made in Italy--which Oswald allegedly obtained through a mail order catalogue.  Would gun enthusiasts have pointed out the bolt-action relic would have been probably the worst possible weapon to use for the job?  Remember, there were many veterans of World War II around who were well-educated in the use of firearms and their capabilities.

And then there's the e-mail chatter...millions of communications from forensics scientists, former members of the Secret Service, members of the Dallas Police force, brain surgeons, ballistic experts, crime scene analysts and those dreaded simulations.  Besides questions from average Americans, the press would have been forced to entertain the question of conspiracy.

The new President of the United States would have been faced with some very different scenarios as well, in his attempt to blame the killing on Oswald.  Lyndon Baines Johnson's appeal to the media to downplay the possibility of a conspiracy for the sake of world peace would have fallen on deaf ears of media executives, like Bill Paley of CBS.

The same scenario would have been played out over and over, during the weekend's events and afterwards.  Would the Warren Commission have been willing to essentially ignore vital evidence regarding Kennedy's assassination?  Would the fact key witnesses in the conspiracy were being killed by the dozens been kept a secret from the American people?  Would then-Warren commission counsel Arlen Specter have had the nerve to come up with the single-bullet theory--which without proves a conspiracy took the life of John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

We have only touched on the assassination itself.  After Jack Ruby silenced Oswald, e-mails would have deluged the Internet with reports from those who knew Mr. Ruby when he was a small-time outfit wanna be in Chicago.

Unfortunately, at the time, innovators in the military and gifted scientists were just dreaming of the impact micro-circuitry would have on the world.  There were no cell phones in Dealey Plaza the day the world was changed.  We were left with grainy films of perhaps one of the most important moments in American history.  But we can dream, can't we?  And with those dreams, can come a different perspective on how the killing of a president was achieved before the eyes of the American people.

CAPTIONS FOR PHOTOS: 

Left:  John F. Kennedy, 35th President of the United States

Middle:  Second from left, the mysterious David Ferrie, possible co-conspirator in Kennedy assassination   

Right:  Jack Ruby silences alleged Kennedy assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald.

Part 1:  http://rffm.typepad.com/republicans_for_fair_medi/2008/04/could-conspirac.html

NOTE: Comments to blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected.  No hyperlinks allowed.

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact:  Dan@rffm.org   

Could Conspiracies, Including the Kennedy Assassination and Others, Survive in Time of Internet?

Conspiracy Sunday by Daniel T. Zanoza

AUTHOR'S NOTE: For a number of weeks, RFFM.org will write a series of columns on the conspiracies which have helped to form the world we live in today.  From the killers themselves to the media's role in conspiracies, RFFM.org will attempt to separate the wheat from the chaff.  There will be no discussions of flying saucers, USO's (unidentified submerged objects) or the like in this series.  RFFM.org encourages readers to submit intelligent comments about the existence of conspiracies and, who knows, perhaps one of the real killers of JFK might actually write in.

Now, before I start receiving weird comments about strange things, let me make one thing perfectly clear.  I don't believe aliens landed in Roswell, New Mexico in 1947.  I don't believe thousands of people are being abducted by little gray men every year and I don't believe President George Bush knew that two of the most important buildings in the financial world would be attacked on 9/11 and didn't do anything about it.  Folks, that would be the last place a capitalist nation would have destroyed.

However, I think it's almost a certainty that John F. Kennedy was the victim of a conspiracy that took his life on November 22, 1963.  I also believe the killings of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert Kennedy were collaborative efforts.  Then, there are unanswered questions about the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995; Flight 800--which blew apart over the Atlantic Ocean in 1996; and the crash of an Airbus in Queens, New York that went down in November of 2001.

Though over 70% of the American public agrees with me regarding the killing of JFK and has questions about the other events I brought up above, I'm sure there is already someone out there calling me a "conspiracy nut".  You see, those who have been assigned to defend the company line have used the "conspiracy nut" phenomenon to explain away all these monumental occurrences.  Indeed, those who believe Sirhan Sirhan had an accomplice with him on that dreadful night in Los Angeles' Ambassador Hotel in 1968 are grouped together with those who claim they have been impregnated by little men with watermelon-sized heads from outer space.

It's part of the modus operandi used by conspiracy debunkers.  We are either mistaken or we're crazy.  And have you heard this one?  Those who believe in conspiracies have a need to fill a psychological void within themselves.  "They just can't believe one man could have killed such an important individual," say the skeptics.  "These people can't be blamed for their delusion.  It's just a natural reaction to a horrific experience."

After hearing this baloney more times than I can count, I've come to the conclusion conspiracy debunkers are crazier than those who think they have been taken to the Crab Nebula and beyond in a cylindrical-shaped object.  Either that or they have received fair compensation for an extraordinary inability to deny facts and accept poppycock.

In fact, have you noticed something?  All the assassinations of the 20th century have a common theme.  It's as though there is a playbook somewhere which must be followed to the "T" no matter how ridiculous that scenario may be.

World War 1 began when Archduke Ferdinand of Austria was assassinated in Sarajevo by a lone anarchist.  Remember that theme.  A lone mad man who changes the world all by his itty bitty self.  The same play book was used when Chicago Mayor Anton Cermak was knocked off by Giuseppe Zangara ... you guessed it, another anarchist who missed the President of the United States with an errant shot that hit the Chicago Mayor who just happened to be fighting Al Capone's mob in an attempt to institute reform.

Could you just hear it?  Somewhere, conspirators were saying, "they're buying this line."  So, they pulled out the same old story in Dallas, Texas.  The loner, Lee Harvey Oswald, somehow squeezed off three shots at the President of the United States.  "It was an easy shot," conspiracy debunkers claim.  Except for the fact Oswald was shooting at the leader of the Free World.  Do you think there was any pressure involved with that situation?  It's like a two foot putt and, if you miss it, you die.

But the quickest way to notice that something is fishy in Denmark is by watching the press.  When the media runs away from a certain angle to a story, while everyone else thinks that story makes sense, there's usually something up.

I remember coming across a 10 year anniversary issue from the Chicago Tribune which commemorated the Kennedy assassination.  It was an actual copy of a late edition of the Chicago Tribune from November 22nd, 23rd and 24th of 1963   As hard as I looked at the combined coverage of Kennedy and Oswald's killing, there was no mention of a possible conspiracy in the entire newspaper.  Even though every person with an ounce of common sense knew the jig was up when Jack Ruby stuck his pistol in Oswald's gut and pulled the trigger as NBC covered the event live.  At one point, Ruby claimed he killed Oswald to save Jackie Kennedy from going through the hardship of a trial.  Yeah right and the check's in the mail.

The obvious story was Jack Rubenstein, a Dallas strip club owner, who once was a small time mob wanna be in Chicago, fulfilled a very dirty, but necessary job and he did it quite well.  As Oswald was loaded into the ambulance to be taken to Dallas' Parkland Memorial Hospital, even I as a ten year old knew we wouldn't see Mr. Oswald again, at least not in this life time.  By the way, Parkland was the same hospital John Kennedy was taken to after the miraculous single bullet wiped out half of those sitting in the presidential limousine.

It was a very neat package, wasn't it?  That is until a small business owner named Abraham Zapruder brought a remarkable piece of film to Time magazine.  Good thing Mr. Zapruder didn't share his film with the FBI or the Dallas Police Department because, like many other pieces of film that were confiscated that fateful day in Dealey Plaza, Mr. Zapruder would have never seen his footage again.

Countless witnesses who took shots of Dealey Plaza on that sunny Friday afternoon, sacrificed their cameras to ...  I don't know what or who they were sacrificed to.  But they didn't get their cameras or film back and you can take whatever you'd like from that bit of information.  However, by the time the FBI and other interested governmental parties got their hands on Mr. Zapruder's piece of cinematic gold, the government couldn't confirm how many copies were made of Zapruder's historical masterpiece.  So, in 1968, Geraldo Rivera, of all people, introduced the Zapruder film to the American public.

Well, there it was.  Absolute proof of a conspiracy that took the life of the 35th President of the United States was shown on television coast to coast.  It was irrefutable.  Kennedy's head went back and to the left...back and to the left...back and to the left.  It was a famous phrase used by Oliver Stone in his classic docudrama "JFK" and Stone certainly sounded like he hit the target, pardon the pun.

"Nope, our eyes were deceiving us," said Gerald Posner, a member of a group of conspiracy debunkers who published book after book explaining why our eyes had deceived us.

Literally thousands of books have been written about the Kennedy assassination, some credible, some not explaining why we were not seeing what we saw on the Zapruder film  But Posner always seemed to find a publisher when his books sold a small fraction of those who wrote about a conspiracy that took place regarding the murder of Kennedy.  I wonder if Posner had another funding source because, if he didn't, his meager book sales should have left him looking for another job long ago, but maybe that was Posner's job all along.

The American public was told:  The fact the President's head snapped backwards from a bullet which blew away the front right part of his brain was a natural occurrence.  And, the impression I received from the whole thing was, if we didn't like this explanation, it was essentially too bad.  In fact, Hollywood made a movie titled "Executive Action" released in 1973, directed by David Miller and starring Burt Lancaster and Robert Ryan which probably described the plot to kill Kennedy to a "T".  You see those who are sent out to debunk a conspiracy must look like they are being transparent.  However, in some situations, these individuals know they are beyond reach of the American people and they shove it in our face, like one of those shaving cream pies Soupy Sales used to toss around.

During the next few weeks, I will discuss conspiracies and how they have worked to change the world we live in.  If you want to find more detailed information on issues like the Kennedy assassination for example, authors Mark Lane and Professor G. Robert Blakey are two great suggestions for openers. 

But, in this series, I will look at the conspiracy playbook, including some of the alleged "killers" who changed the world, if you believe the powers that be.  Then, I will discuss the media's role in conspiracies.  How can a conspiracy to kill the President of the United States be kept secret for 45 years?  Well, it hasn't been kept a secret at all and that's part of the beauty--or the horror--of it.  Who is to blame for conspiracies?  In other words, who has the power and the ability to conceal the facts behind tragedies which have altered the course of time.  And, finally, what would happen if the American people knew will be looked at in a future installment.

If the men in black suits don't come to take me away, look for Part 2 of this series next Sunday.  In the meantime, don't let the bed bugs bite, don't take any wooden nickels and never trust anyone over 30 or maybe never trust anyone under 30.  Excuse me, I think I hear a helicopter above my home.  No paranoia here.

NOTE: Comments to blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected.  No hyperlinks allowed.

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact Dan@rffm.org

The Hamas Charter: Europeans Should Take Lesson From Israeli Resolve In Middle East Conflict by William Bence

EDITOR'S NOTE: William Bence wrote this column for RFFM.org nearly three years ago.  However, it contains information all Americans should know about the radical Islam.  It is a must read.

Bence writes Europe can look back at history, in order to deal with Islamic extremists.  European secularism has left that continent vulnerable to the influences of radical Islam. Author states European turn-back to Christian and cultural roots may be best defense versus Islamic-style fascism.

RFFM.org Guest Commentary by William Bence *

Hamas and Hezbollah are waging war on Israel right now and, as usual, the Europeans are decrying Israel’s efforts to defend itself.  There are demands for cease-fire, talks and calls for peace.  Europeans seem to be oblivious to the fact Islamo-Fascist organizations like Hamas are dedicated to the absolute destruction of Jews.  In fact, that goal is a part of the Hamas charter.  It is a basic tenet of Jihad ideology, written into their constitution.  Many Europeans, callous to the plight of the Jews and averse to the sometimes necessary waging of war, may be under the delusion the realization of Israel’s demise would actually bring peace to the Middle East.  But as long as Europeans can blame the Jewish state for problems in the region, they don’t have to face the very real Islamo-Fascist threat to themselves.  Europeans need to take a look at what else is in the Hamas charter.

Weekly Standard Executive Editor Fred Barnes says Hamas is committed to the conquest of all lands EVER under Muslim control.  Again, this is a basic tenet of Jihad ideology.  The world is divided into the lands of Muslims and the rest are the lands of "Jews, Crusaders and Infidels" (to use the Al Qaeda chief’s words).  Not only do these latter lands need to be brought under submission to Islam, it is an affront to Allah that any Muslim land should be occupied by non-Muslims.  Therefore, Hamas has an "Israel First" stratagem for war.  Europe is next.  Islamo-Fascists have a long memory, using a faulty version of history, and a fantastical vision of the "Caliphate" of old.

Isolationists and pacifists in this country readily agree the Jihadis are offended by the presence of Western troops in their lands.  They seem to think that if the West were to withdraw its troops from the Arabian Peninsula all of this Jihadi unrest would die down.  This view is naïve.  Westerners tend to look back only a short way into history and see a time when the Muslim world was largely subdued by Western Imperialism.  But that is only a relative blip from the 1700’s until now.  For centuries before, Islamic powers were a constant threat to Western Civilization.  Crusades, the Reconquista and, a few centuries later, Imperialism, were largely efforts to push back and contain the Muslim threat.  The Jihadi remembers well, however, large swaths of Europe (much of Spain, parts of Italy, the Balkans, Greece, Southern Ukraine and Southern Russia) were once Muslim lands.  And he fervently believes that it is the will of Allah they be reclaimed AND extended.

Can Islamo-Fascist ideology ever do anything more than terror-bomb Europe?  What Muslim power could emerge to conquer Europe in the way Hamas and Hezbollah wish to do with Israel?  In the current war, Hamas and Hezbollah are extensions of Syria and Iran and a large Palestinian Muslim population, mostly sympathetic to Jihad, exists on the borders of Israel.  Given the dynamism of Muslim populations in Europe and the demographic decline of Europeans, one can foresee a similar development possibly shaping in the region's future.  Spain was rocked by Al Qaeda attacks which ushered in a Socialist regime, thus facilitating Spain’s continued demographic and cultural decline.  Studies after the London subway bombing revealed a remarkable number of British-born Muslims are sympathetic to Jihadist goals.  Muslim riots in France spread to the Low Countries, Denmark and Germany.  The press was reticent to identify the attacks and fire-bombings as "Muslim" riots, preferring instead to label them "immigrant," "minority," or "of North African descent," etc.  The press also largely failed to mention the rioters attacked synagogues and churches, indicating there was a nationalist type of hatred for the European heritage.  That is Islamo-Fascism.

Possibly one of the most telling events, with portents of things to come, occurred in Denmark during the riots.  There Danish police prepared to restore order to a Muslim neighborhood.  They were faced off by the rioters--Muslim men who shouted "this is our land."  Is it possible that as Muslim communities reject the radically secular, post-modern, suicidal culture of the Europeans and continue to grow, Jihad ideologues will soon come to claim European lands for Islam that were never historically under Muslim control?  Norway has already permitted aspects of Sharia law to be used for Muslim communities living there, a prospect that places women and children under rules antithetical to Western ideals.  A similar initiative was narrowly defeated in Canada which suffers the same European demographic and cultural decline.  The multiculturalist expectation the immigrants would naturally adopt liberal secularist ways doesn’t seem to be happening.  European nations that were never part of Muslim conquests are today the subject of Islamic colonialism.  It is a process (amply documented by historian Bat Ye’or) advanced by Arab states and adhered to by European multiculturalists (who seem to love every heritage, but their own).

Shifts in power and societal transformations through ideas usually occur over generations.  Europeans are understandably apprehensive about the failure to assimilate Muslims, many of whom seem prone to the appeal of Jihad ideology.  But secular Europeans have abandoned any sort of transcendent vision, the kind necessary to sustain a vigorous civilization, and have little to offer the immigrants other than state welfarism and hedonism.  Compared to this, too many immigrants may choose Islamo-Fascism to provide them greater meaning and purpose.

There are hopeful signs of resurgent interest in Christian spirituality among Europeans.  Perhaps this represents a greater appreciation for the Judeo-Christian legacy.  In some European countries, notably Poland, there are conservative political victories and effective pro-life and pro-family resistance to the culture of death policies imposed by the European Union.  Just as Poland’s King Jan arrived in time to help Christian armies, in an historic reversal, which drove back the Turkish invasion from Central Europe in 1683 and just as Poland became the starting point for the movement that crumbled Soviet imperialism in the 1980’s, perhaps the Polish nation will be one source for a new spiritual revitalization of Europe.

Meanwhile, Europe’s scapegoating of Israel, in order to deflect Jihad attacks from without and placate Muslim populations within, is loser policy.  It is also a collectively unconscious desire to ignore the reality of Islamo-Fascist designs on Europe.  Today, Israel seeks to vanquish its immediate enemies.  Europeans should hope that Israel will succeed.  The Israelis have made every reasonable (and even unreasonable) effort for peace, using Euro-style appeasement.  Setting back Hezbollah for the next generation, which is the goal of Israel, should be seen as being in the best interest of Europeans because, at some level of success, in the future, Islamo-Fascism will menace Europe in a far more significant way than it already has.  The presence of Muslim colonies throughout Europe, combined with global Jihad ideology, may one day provide the justification for territorial claims and Jihad war in all European lands.

* William Bence hosts the WCRA Morning Show on News Talk AM 1090 in Effingham, Illinois 
Mr. Bence can be contacted via e-mail at:  william@cromwellradio.com

Guest commentaries do not necessarily reflect the views of RFFM.org

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact: Dan@rffm.org

Kennedy's Inexperience Nearly Led To World War III: Can We Expect Same From Obama?

Commentary by Daniel T. Zanoza, Executive Director

Perhaps the greatest historic misnomer today regards the presidency of John F. Kennedy.  Historic revisionists say Kennedy had a successful administration--even though he had little or no experience in foreign affairs.

In reality, the Kennedy presidency possibly represented the most dangerous period in American history.  From its inception, Kennedy quickly learned the world was not a place of cordial state dinners and visions of Camelot.

One of Kennedy's first important duties included a summit meeting held in Europe with Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev.  Kennedy entered the meeting with the rambunctious Communist Party leader with an air of confidence.  But the summit meeting turned into a disaster for the 43 year-old President and he left a beaten man who, in the midst of a very hot Cold War, had ratcheted up the possibility for confrontation between the two world powers to the highest level since World War II.

However, Kennedy's inexperience became even more evident during the Bay of Pigs fiasco where the island of Cuba was invaded by CIA-aided Cuban nationals.  It was another day of infamy for the United States as Kennedy called off CIA air cover for the pro-American invading Cubans and many of them were captured or killed on beaches just 90 miles from the coast of Florida.

By this time, the Soviet Union knew they were dealing with a political novice.  Kennedy might have been well-honed in the skills of America's wheelings and dealings in smoke-filled back rooms, but his acumen regarding the hard real world was grossly lacking and the wrong people knew it.  Khrushchev quickly took advantage of Kennedy's naiveté and installed strategic missiles which had the potential of attacking American cities from the island of Cuba.  In just two short years, Kennedy's inexperience had put the world on the brink of World War III.

Historians all agree Khrushchev would have never taken such provocative steps if Eisenhower or Truman were still in the White House.  But the Soviet Prime Minister saw weakness and he took advantage of it.

There have been many stories on the subject of the Cuban missile crisis.  In essence, the situation was resolved because Kennedy agreed to pull American-manned Jupiter missiles out of Turkey.  In return, Fidel Castro dismantled the missile sites in Cuba and Kennedy was portrayed as a hero to the American public when, in reality, his lack of knowledge regarding foreign affairs could have wiped out mankind.

That is why it is extremely dangerous when some say Barack Hussein Obama's lack of experience will not be a factor in his ability to lead our nation.  But, in this case, Obama lacks experience in domestic issues and foreign affairs as well.

It is possible America finds itself in a world that is more dangerous today than the one which met John F. Kennedy in January of 1961 when he took office.  China is building up its military at an exponential rate and it still has its sites on Taiwan.  Some say the Chinese are waiting for a time to call America's bluff regarding our nation's treaty with Taiwan and when that comes would a Barack Obama have what it takes to deal with the situation?  Russia--under Vladimir Putin--is also flexing its muscles and many military experts believe the former Cold War is heating up once again.  Then, of course, there is America's war against terror.

These are all daunting challenges waiting to face the next President of the Unites States.  Will that man or woman be up to the task?  Or will the Unites States essentially roll the dice on its future?  Is Barack Obama the answer and, more important, can Americans afford not to ask that question?

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact:  Dan@rffm.org