FIRST-LET'S HEAR FROM ALICE WALKER

First – Let's Hear From Alice Walker

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Neal Boortz
Friday, Oct. 5, 2001

You know Alice Walker, don’t you? She’s the author of "The Color Purple." Well, Alice has now weighed in with her solution to the bin Laden problem. Her solution is love. She thinks that all we need to do is to get him over here so that he can see all of the human suffering he has caused … and that would cure him. The only response, Walker says, is love.

Can people please tell me why this woman would ever have one shred of legitimacy left with the general public? Why do we even bother to read the words of leftist lay-downs like this? How do their insipid thoughts even get into the media? Let’s try to put this as simply as possible. She’s an idiot. She has no connection whatsoever with reality. Alice Walker is living in some sort of a pathetic artistic fifth dimension accessible only to the marginally coherent. More like her in our history, and freedom would have died long ago.

Are We Just Suckering Iraq?

Believe me, I've tried to read as much as I can about the terrorist attacks, who’s behind them, what this religious fervor is all about, which countries are for us or against us. The more I read, the more two things become clearly evident: (1) An even bigger problem than Osama Yo Momma is the presence of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of terrorists, and (2) Iraq is involved in the terrorist attacks on the U.S.

I guess I can understand why we’re not saying much about Iraq. If the United States can show its ability to go after bin Laden without slaughtering large numbers of innocent Afghans, it will be easier for us to turn to Hussein and say, "OK, Pal. Here come the inspectors. You step aside or we’ll carry you aside.” But – if this whole exercise ends with Hussein untouched we will pay dearly for it later.

An Indictment? Indictment, Hell – It Merits an Attack

We’ll add Pakistan to the list of nations and people who think that the bin Laden matter is a mere legal problem. Yeah ... we have enough to indict him now, so let’s arrest him, have a bail hearing, give him a lawyer and try him.

And just where would Pakistan like to see bin Laden tried? Probably in some Islamic country before an Islamic jury.

No trial. Kill him. Alive he is a rallying point for Islamic fanatics who will kill tens of thousands of innocent people around the world to get his release. Alive, bin Laden could still kill – from the comfort of his jail cell.

Oh, and if they did try Bin Laden … how could he find someone to defend him? Are you kidding? He probably already has a business card hidden under his turban that reads "Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Hot Shot.”

Brokaw Doesn't Get It …

Tom Brokaw is at it again. He's decided to enter the argument over news anchormen wearing American flag lapel pins. He doesn’t like it. Says Brokaw : "I don't think a journalist ought to be wearing a flag, because it does seem to be, to me at least, a sign of solidarity toward whatever the government is doing, and that is not our role,"

Brokaw, like most leftists, is unable to make a distinction between the United States and its government. Someone needs to tell him that it’s the flag of the United States of America, not the flag of the government of the United States of America. Wearing the flag shows a love of our country and our heritage, not the love of our government. Maybe, like the hideous Clintons, Brokaw thinks that America is great because of, not in spite of, its government.

Reuters News Service and Freedom Fighters

It looks like the U.S. isn’t the only country graced with idiotic leftists in the information business. Reuters is the worldwide news agency based in Great Britain. Reuters, like CNN, doesn’t like the word "terrorist." In fact, it is the position of Reuters that "one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”

Wow. This Western news agency is actually prepared to tell us that someone who would hijack an airplane, slit the flight attendant’s throat, and then fly that airplane into an office building with the intent of killing as many civilians as possible is a "freedom fighter”?

How sick – but, then, we’re talking about the left here.

Major Networks Spike Commercial Advocating Armed Pilots

In the days following Sept. 11, the Front Sight Firearms Training Institute stepped up to the plate. For those of you who don't know, Front Sight teaches private citizens and public servants how to use guns defensively at their facilities in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Front Sight offered to train each and every commercial pilot in the world how to use a gun defensively. They offered to do this completely free of charge. They're willing to contribute up to $150 million to train commercial airline pilots – and it won't cost the government, taxpayers, airlines or airline passengers a dime.

So the Front Sight Founder's Society paid for a 60-second commercial encouraging Americans to contact President Bush, the FAA and the airlines to demand that commercial pilots be armed. The ad also mentions Front Sight's offer of free defensive handgun training for pilots. The commercial was sent to the major TV networks to be run during prime time.

According to Front Sight, the TV networks don't want to touch the ad with a 10-foot pole.

Are we really that surprised? These same networks use their news programs to try to convince Americans that guns are bad. Guns are dangerous. They kill people. Even the prime-time entertainment shows slip anti-gun messages into their scripts. There were several shows ("ER," for one) whose season finales last spring dealt with mass shootings.

The networks are bending over backward to meet the anti-gun lobby. They couldn't possibly show the American people the overwhelming statistical evidence that guns save lives – not even when armed pilots or passengers would most likely have been able to fend off the hijackers on Sept. 11.

Arming people just doesn't fit with the liberal agenda.

Front Sight isn't about to stop promoting its message. They're reworking the ad to make it more politically correct. They'll try again next week. Here's hoping they succeed.

To view Front Sight's advertisement, click here: http://www.frontsight.com/real/front1.ram or here: http://www.frontsight.com/real/front1.wmv

Gun Weenie Comes Under Fire

Ever heard of Michael Bellesiles? He's a historian at Emory University in Atlanta. He's also the author of "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture." His book received the Bancroft Prize, the most prestigious award in the writing of American history.

The gist of Bellesiles' book is that "America's gun culture is an invented tradition." He says guns were far less important to early American culture than is commonly believed. He backs this claim up with historical records.

Trouble is, as the Boston Globe and National Review point out, Bellesiles' sources are a little fishy. Some of the most important statements Bellesiles makes in his book are based on data that just don't exist.

What data, you ask? National Review's Melissa Seckora has a prime example. Bellesiles claims that he counted guns in probate records of the estates of people who died between 1849 and 1850, and between 1858 and 1859 in San Francisco. But everybody knows that those records don't exist anymore – because they were destroyed in the 1906 earthquake and fire that ravaged San Francisco.

Now there's been some movement in this case. The head of Emory University's history department has demanded that Bellesiles write a detailed defense of his book! James Melton said, "What is important is that he defend himself and the integrity of his scholarship immediately. Depending on his response, the university will respond appropriately. If there is prima facie evidence of scholarly misconduct, the university has to conduct a thorough investigation. Whether it be a purely internal inquiry, or the university brings in distinguished scholars in the field, will depend on how Michael responds."

Bellesiles promises that he will publish his defense of his work in a future newsletter of the Organization of American Historians.

How about that, folks? I must say that I’m impressed. Emory University, a true leftist haven, has won back some of my respect for demanding accountability from an obviously anti-gun leftist historian. I’m sure they’re thrilled.

Neal Boortz is the hugely popular nationally syndicated radio host.