Keyes on Kosovo
Bill Nalty
Alan Keyes 'America's Voice' TV / Radio 9-12pmET M-F
Home: http://www.alankeyes.com/
Archives: http://www.alankeyes.com/archive.html
Listen Talkspot 9-11am: http://209.67.114.205/channel1.ram
Listen Keyes 9-12pm: http://www.alankeyes.com/aklive.ram
Watch A.V. 9-12pm: http://www.americasvoice.com/watchnow/live.ram
800-520-1234|al...@alankeyes.com
On TalkSpot: Gary Aldrich follows Keyes in the 11 o'clock hour.
Nalty News: http://members.xoom.com/NaltyNews/
-------------------------------------------------
Keyes 2000 Weekly Update - April 6, 1999
Please distribute this message!
Visit us at http://www.Keyes2000.org to subscribe to this
update.
Or send a subscription request to Ambas...@Keyes2000.org
We need your help NOW to keep building momentum. Please
visit --
http://www.keyes2000.org/join/index.html now and sign up to
help us with a monthly donation. We are counting on you!!!
* * * * * * * *
In this edition:
1. Keyes on Kosovo
2. Donor Premium Announcement!
3. Update on Alan
4. Note from the Technical coordinator
5. Note on a poll
6. April Keyes events
* * * * * * * *
1. Keyes on Kosovo
Dr. Keyes wrote on the NATO assault on Yugoslavia in this
week's WorldNetDaily.com column. This column and all of
the Keyes columns can be reached by following the side bar
link to "The Commentators" on www.worldnetdaily.com .
The following is an excerpt from the first segment of The
Alan Keyes Show, Friday, April 2, 1999:
The emotional logic of war is a very dangerous thing, and
eventually it overtakes judgment in such a way that war
becomes an end in itself. You are fighting because . . .
you have been hurt by the fighting, because people you love
have been killed in the fighting. At that point, fighting
becomes its own reason for existence. And war is extremely
dangerous then.
But in the context that we have been in for the last half
century it is more dangerous than it used to be. This is
one of the reasons that the attitude that was taken toward
conflict changed in the period after the Second World War.
And one ceased to hear many of the things that now, sadly,
are once again being reintroduced rhetorically into the
discussion of war. The notion, for instance, that once you
get involved in war your objective is victory and at any
cost - that you just move forward and do whatever it takes
to win.
Why is it that in the context of the post-World War II
period you didn't hear American leaders saying things like
that? I think it is pretty obvious. We didn't say things
like that because we had thunderbolts. We didn't say
things like that because nuclear weapons are included in
our arsenal, and if you give people the impression that you
are going to do whatever it takes to win, that would seem
to suggest that it means up to and including nuclear
weapons. And we had a greater sense of maturity and
responsibility than to talk about war as if we did not
understand the constraints that our enormous power now
placed on us, the deep responsibility we had, not only to
ourselves but to the human race, to make sure that we would
never speak or act in a way that showed that we had
surrendered to the logic of war where nuclear weapons are
concerned.
I look back on the period of America's possession of
nuclear weapons as a great power since the Second World
War, and one of the reasons I have always felt a sense of
great appreciation and pride for the way we behaved was
that I think we acquitted ourselves very well under the
burdensome responsibility of this awesome power. I think
we did so in many respects, even in our thinking. When I
sat in the government and we talked about things that were
going on in Europe and elsewhere, we would always be
thinking - among other things - about whether or not a
contemplated action led into a scenario that could escalate
into nuclear war. And we wanted to be careful not to
carelessly do things that would move our policy or the
world's into that mode when we did not believe that what
was at stake required it. We were very careful.
That careful thinking was a sign of moral responsibility.
It was a sign of maturity. It was a sign that we took
seriously our responsibility before the world for the power
that came to us through the possession of these awesome
weapons.
I'm listening to people now - McCain, Lugar, all of these
folks - and they are talking as if we no longer live in a
world in which we have to be aware of that responsibility.
And they are doing so, I think, because they say Russia is
in a shambles, and although the nuclear weapons are there,
there is no chance that a conflict could escalate, and so
forth.
I think what we are seeing here is very typical of human
beings. When we think we have gotten out of a situation of
danger, that is when we engage in the kind of reckless
behavior that brings down upon us the very danger we
thought we had escaped. It is a classic case of human
folly, and I think we are seeing its beginnings right now.
As I pointed out yesterday, even thought the Russian
military is in a shambles, I don't think that we would
carelessly want to get involved in a military situation
that might require that we take on that shambles of an
army. Because it would require an awful lot of war to put
it down. And are we ready for that awful lot of war?
We are told that Russia won't bother with us because they
need our money and are politically incoherent at the moment
under this boobie Yeltsin. This is true. But on the wave
of pride, on the wave of old Russian chauvinism, on the
wave of resentment and a sense of humiliation that is
generated by the spectacle of this Slavic people being
pummeled by NATO, you don't think it is possible that
demagogues will arise in the former Soviet Union who will
be able to exploit the growing sense of humiliation and
dissatisfaction in order to put in place a government that
would be more bellicose, and that would confront us, if
this conflict goes on for any length of time, with a very
different situation than we are now in?
And I also want to remind you that if we get involved in a
war that also involves Russia, and that might ultimately
require that we attack and deal with Russia, I think we
would want to remember that when Napoleon invaded Russia,
the Russian army was in a shambles. We do remember that,
don't we? And when the Nazis invaded Russia, the Russian
army was in a shambles. And yet you will recall that in
both those cases, the rallied stubbornness of the Russian
people was able, in the end, to cause serious military
problems for those forces that had proven so "invincible"
against the conventional will of war in Europe.
And so we had better think these things through. Because I
don't think that we want to get into a scenario that pushes
us in that direction. We responsibly and maturely avoided
such recklessness in the course of the last half-century.
And now suddenly we have a president whose adolescent
impulses, immature judgment, lack of moral conscience and
judgment, is leading us recklessly to wander off down a
road that has all these implications. And we are
dismissing them, now, because we think we are in a safe
situation. But that is precisely the moment when you back
yourself into a corner where the circumstances best avoided
jump out at you, in order to put the world on the brink of
destruction.
It is exactly when human beings believe they are safe that
they behave in the reckless fashion that brings on the
danger that they most fear. Are we, right now, engaging in
that kind of reckless carelessness? I think we are.
Alan Keyes, April 2, 1999
* * * * * * * *
2. Donor Premium Announcement!
Everyone should have received the "$30 and above" donor
premium for the month of February by now. There has been
some concern expressed about the audio quality not being
the best available.
We thank you for your concern and we understand that the
audio quality is marginal, but felt that the subject of the
tape was different from Alan's normal speeches and worth
sharing with the premium contributors. It was not intended
to be copied or widely distributed.
We are actively working to capture Alan's on-going speeches
in high quality digital format in order to deliver the best
quality audio sound possible. Several of the speeches to be
captured in April will be in digital format.
We do appreciate your patience and understanding as we
continually work to upgrade and deliver the best quality
audio and video possible.
On a similar note, due to some systems upgrades with our
database software being conducted at the moment, we are
running a touch behind on the posting of data for the month
of March. In light of this, and in order to ensure the
most accurate data possible, we will be postponing the
March premium and combining it with the April premium. At
the end of April we will mail everyone who donates $30 or
more during the months of March and April TWO audio tapes
of Alan Keyes speeches.
There are several excellent speaking engagements of Alan's
coming up during the month of April, so we should be able
to offer you TWO outstanding tapes.
Your generosity and flexibility are critical to the success
of Keyes 2000. We are counting on you! If you haven't yet
made a $30 donation at www.Keyes2000.org , please do so
right now, and encourage your friends to do the same.
Success of Keyes 2000 is up to YOU!!!
Click on http://www.keyes2000.org/join/index.html right now
to support Alan and receive your tapes of his extraordinary
speeches!
* * * * * * * *
3. Update on Alan
Ambassador Alan Keyes gave an address at the Somerset
County Republican Central Committee Fundraiser on April 1,
1999, in Princess Anne, Maryland. The University of
Maryland was the setting for this annual Lincoln Day dinner
which was open to the public. Mr. Stephen G. Frey,
Chairman of the Central Committee, served as chairman of
the event. Maryland Congressman Wayne Gilchrest of
Congressional District 1 introduced Dr. Keyes. Also in
attendance was Maryland Republican Party Chairman Dick
Bennett.
On Friday, April 2nd, an editorial in The Wall Street
Journal explained New Hampshire's lively debate being waged
over taxes and schools. Using local property taxes to fund
public schools has become illegal under a state Supreme
Court order. The Court ruled that ".... the disparities
in local school spending created by differing property tax
rates were unconstitutional." The discussion centers around
what new taxes, if any, to create to fund public schools
there. New Hampshire state Representative David Corbin
claims the state Supreme Court's decision is a power grab
and vows to fight any new taxes. As noted in the
editorial, a number of GOP Presidential hopefuls, including
Alan Keyes, agree with Rep. Corbin's plan. "One of the
great questions that the American people, and specifically
the people of New Hampshire, have to ask themselves," Keyes
opines, "is: Who will govern this great country and this
great state-- the people or unelected justices? I would
like to think that the people still retain the right of
self-government. The people's right to govern themselves
is not secure when 'consent of the governed and the rule of
law' is replaced by court-created and court-enforced
visions of a just society."
Interestingly, as the editorial in The Wall Street
Journal pointed out, Elizabeth Dole and Governor George W.
Bush "have been silent" on this issue.
The Washington Post, CNN and several other media
organizations called last week to hear Ambassador Keyes'
opinions on the Kosovo situation. There will be more
requests in the coming weeks. As the only trained diplomat
of all the Presidential hopefuls, Keyes is eminently
qualified to comment.
* * * * * * * *
4. Note from the Technical Coordinator
The message on how to update your information to keep our
data base as current as possible, so that we can contact
you with local information about appearances by Dr. Keyes
and other Keyes 2000 events, will be included in a separate
message this week.
* * * * * * * *
5. Note on a poll
Here's an interesting quotation from Bruce Calder of the
Calder Net poll, and then a comment from one of Alan's key
Iowa supporters.
"-CALDER.NET Developments- Well, as soon as I mentioned
Alan Keyes was losing in my Presidential Poll, a surge of
votes came in for him, pushing him back into the lead. I
am asked often "If only one vote is allowed per person,
how can Alan Keyes be winning?" I suppose that's because
virtually every enthusiastic Alan Keyes supporter on the
web has voted in my poll. I have no problem with people
encouraging like-minded people to vote in my poll. The more
votes there are, the more likely the results will reflect
reality.
http://www.calder.net/president/president.htm "
It's great that Bruce recognizes the enthusiasm of Alan's
supporters. However, it seems to me as if perhaps Bruce
isn't convinced of the "reality" of Alan's lead. Why do I
think that...? Because he supposes that "virtually every
enthusiastic Alan Keyes supporter on the web has (already)
voted in (his) poll." Based on that assumption one would
have to conclude that there is nowhere else for Alan to go
in this poll but down from here on out. We need to put this
myth to rest. Let's continue to get the word out to the
growing network of supporters to vote in Bruce's poll and
keep Alan at the top.
Jeff Ray, Ankeny, Iowa
* * * * * * * *
6. April 1999 Schedule of Events:
4/7/92 Wednesday evening
University of Richmond
Camp Concert Hall Booker Hall of Music
Richmond, VA
Please call Mike Krempasky for more details (804) 662-4460
4/8/99 Thursday evening
Aid to Women Dessert
New Covenant Bible Church
Cedar Rapids, IA
Free Admission
For reservations please call (319) 364-8967
4/9/99 Friday evening
7:00pm - 9:00pm C.T. Renew America Rally
Location: North High School
626 W. 53rd St.
Davenport, IA
FREE ADMISSION
Please call (515) 285-8168 for more details
4/10/99 Saturday afternoon
2:00pm - 4:00pm C.T.
Renew America Rally
Washington Middle School
751 2nd Ave. S.
FREE ADMISSION Clinton, IA
Please call (515) 285-8168 for more details
4/10/99 Saturday evening
7:00pm - 9:00pm C.T.
Renew America Rally
Hotel Muscatine
101 W. Mississippi Dr.
FREE ADMISSION Muscatine, IA
Please call (515) 285-8168 for more details
4/14/99 Wednesday evening
7:00pm - 9:00pm E.T.
Renew America Rally
Capital Center For The Arts
FREE ADMISSION Concord, N.H.
Please call (603) 964-1301 for more details
4/15/99 Thursday evening
University of Missouri
Allen Auditorium and Sciences Bldg.
Columbia, Missouri
Please call Mike Pirner for more details (573) 474-9976
4/16/99 Friday evening
Michigan Decency Action Council, Inc. Fundraiser
Amway Ballroom, Grand Plaza Hotel
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Reservations are required
please call (616) 698-6553 for further information
4/21/99 Wednesday evening
Williams College, Chapin Hall
Williamstown, Massachusetts
Please call Chris Stephan for more details (413) 597-6162
4/25/99 Sunday morning
PRAYER BREAKFAST California Republican Assembly
Newark/Fremont Hilton
Newark, California
For reservations and further details
please call (925) 417- 1135
4/26/99 Monday evening
Central Arkansas Christian Schools Fundraiser
Excelsior Hotel
Little Rock, Arkansas
Tickets are $125.00 for private reception and dinner or
$100.00 for dinner only
Please call (501) 758-3163 for reservations and further
details.
4/29/99 Thursday evening
7:00pm - 9:00pm E.T.
Renew America Rally
Yoken's Restaurant
FREE ADMISSION Portsmith, N.H.
Please call (603) 964-1301 for more details
4/30/99 Friday evening
7:00pm - 9:00pm C.T.
Renew America Rally
Ramada Inn
2759 Mt. Pleasant
FREE ADMISSION Burlington, IA
Please call (515) 285-8168 for more details
* * * * * * * *
We need your financial support now! Donations may be
mailed to:
Keyes 2000 5025 North Central, Suite 408 Phoenix, AZ 85012
You may also contribute by credit card or print a donation
form to mail to us by clicking "Support Keyes2000" at
http://www.Keyes2000.org right now, or go directly to our
secure server site at
http://www.Keyes2000.org/join/index.html
* * * * * * * *
Paid for and authorized by Keyes 2000
-------------------------
This message is only sent to those who have expressed interest in Alan
Keyes. If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please reply to this
message with the following as the *first line* of the message body:
REMOVE [email addesss]
-------------------------
Rob Robertson
>
> Alan Keyes on Radio and "America's Voice" TV
>
> Alan Keyes 'America's Voice' TV / Radio 9-12pmET M-F
> Home: http://www.alankeyes.com/
> Archives: http://www.alankeyes.com/archive.html
> Listen Talkspot 9-11am: http://209.67.114.205/channel1.ram
> Listen Keyes 9-12pm: http://www.alankeyes.com/aklive.ram
> Watch A.V. 9-12pm: http://www.americasvoice.com/watchnow/live.ram
> 800-520-1234|al...@alankeyes.com
>
> On TalkSpot: Gary Aldrich follows Keyes in the 11 o'clock hour.
>
> Nalty News: http://members.xoom.com/NaltyNews/
> -------------------------------------------------
<snip>
From Aviation Week & Space Technology, March 1, 1999, page 54;
Terrorism Needs Massive Response
Paul Mann/Washington
Massive retaliation should be the mainspring of American deterrence
policy against terrorist use of weapons of mass destruction, a new
analysis recommends. Titled *The Ultimate Terrorists* and written by
a former Clinton Administration official, it says the U.S. might even
have recourse to nuclear weapons in certain circumstances, but that
the counterpunch arms the U.S. would use to retaliate against a
terrorist WMD attack should be kept secret to maximize their
detterent effect.
Authored by Jessica Stern, formerly of the National Security Council,
the analysis also calls for pursuit of detection technologies against
biological and chemical warfare, better U.S. intelligence evaluations
of WMD terrorism and improved operational command of the public health
infrastructure.
The U.S. government's detterent posture must be carefully tailored
to the form of WMD attack, argues Stern, now with the Council on
Foreign Relations, who formerly led a nuclear smuggling interagency
group as director of NSC Russian, Ukrainian and Eurasian affairs.
The threat of massive retaliation makes sense in responding to
state-sponsored terrorist acts, she asserts. But "threatening to
retaliate with nuclear weapons for acts of chemical warfare or
chemical terrorism would not be proportional, and might undermine
efforts towards nuclear nonproliferation."
Accordingly, she says, the appropriate detterence policy is to
threaten massive retaliation "without providing details about the
weapons likely to be employed. And threats of retaliation should
not be limited to terrorism that crosses national borders; the
world cannot afford to ignore terrorist acts like Iraq's
chemical attacks against its own civilians. The next attack against
noncombatants might well involve biological weapons, and might be
significantly more deadly than anything seen so far."
Stern believes most of the constraints against terrorist use of
WMD are eroding, but that capabilities to minimize the threat are
making gains. Biological agents, considered the hardest-to-detect
WMD, can be ferreted out by applying polymerase chain reaction (PCR)
technology to the development of highly sensitive detection devices
for some biological organisms.
The Navy Medical Research Institute has developed a mobile laboratory,
weighing about 300 lb. and transported in four boxes, that combine
PCR technology with immunoanalysis and other procedures for rapid
identification of biological agents in 5-20 min. That is far faster
than the Centers for Disease Control can identify a species today
(AW&ST Jan. 18, p. 29).
New fabrication technologies such as microelectromechanical systems
and microfluidics may make possible miniaturization of detectors,
including those based on older technologies like enzyme immunoassay,
according to Stern. Hypersensitive detectors smaller than a human
hand "will soon be available [and] the U.S. Army hopes eventually
to place these detectors on soldiers' dog tags."
Stern considers better intelligence as crucial as improved technology,
and faults a number of U.S. practices:
* Government agencies maintain at least 12 databases related to WMD
terrorism, but often are unaware of each other's efforts. They collect
the same data twice or more and they segregate domestic from
international data, robbing U.S. leaders of a coherent worldwide
picture of the terrorist threat.
* The CIA, claiming lack of funds, has not systematically correlated
the character and complexion of various terrorist groups with their
suspected propensity to commit acts of extreme violence. "IF the U.S.
government is to have any hope of predicting and preventing WMD
terrorism, these data must be analyzed properly."
Like other experts, Stern points to the interagency weaknesses that
might arise in the chain of command in the event of a WMD incident in
a major city, which some military specialists predict will be the
"battlefield of the future." Mock counter-terrorist exercises have
shown, for example, that the FBI might be narrowly focused on
identifying and capturing the terrorists, while the Pentagon and the
Energy Dept. might be absorbed with disabling, say, a nuclear device.
And the situation might deteriorate if, in the crisis atmosphere,
disabling procedures went awry and radioactive dispersal occurred,
unleashing yet new emergencies in a kind of cascading effect.
Most metropolitan centers remain unprepared for biological and
chemical attacks as well, although government programs have been put
in motion to rectify the deficiency. Monitors of a chemical warfare
drill in New York concluded that "dozens of firefighters and police"
would have been killed for lack of communications and equipment.
"Few emergency personnel are trained even to recognize the effects
of poisoning by chemical weapons," Stern found. "Cities have not
stockpiled pharmaceuticals, and hospitals are unprepared to deal
with contaminated patients or large numbers of casualties."
At most American hospitals, contaminated victims would have to be
hosed down in parking lots before transfer to emergency rooms, to
prevent the exposure of ER personnel and non-victim patients. City
hospitals "are unlikely even to have enough body bags," Stern warned.
Yet the future of warfare lies "in the streets, sewers, high-rise
buildings, industrial parks and sprawl of houses, shacks and
shelters that form the broken cities of our world," predicts ex-U.S.
Army military theorist Ralph Peters. In a forthcoming study,
*Fighting for the Future*, he contends that modern combat encounters
in such diverse cities as Tuzla, Mogadishu, Beirut and Saigon are
"but a prologue, with the drama yet to come."
In the 21st century, "in an uncontrollably urbanized world, we will
not be able to avoid urban deployments short of war and even full-scale
city combat," Peters argues. He calls cities, "the post-modern
equivalent of jungles and mountains," claiming that the relevence of
mountain terain is diminishing in strategic, operational and even
tactical importance, except in instances where the countryside is the
repository of crucial natural resources.
Potential trouble spots range from Mexico and Brazil to India and
the Pacific Rim, home to gargantuan urban enclaves of 20 million
people or more. Should U.S. forces have to fight in them, they might
face serious biological threats having nothing to do with WMD terrorism,
but requiring similar countermeasures. By definition, casualties soar
in urban warfare, owing to door-to-door combat. Given the appalling
sanitation in many quarters of world cities, combat forces probably
would face a host of septic threats. "Even patrol operations in sewer
systems that did not encounter an enemy could produce debilitating,
even fatal, illnesses." Troops will need new forms of armor, perhaps
"antiseptic biosheathing" that would coat soldiers' bodies and protect
them agaisnt cuts and abrasions that increase vulnerability to
infection.
Urban aerial combat, as Mogadishu demonstrated, will require
helicopters
that are stealthier, more agile, and equipped with better defensive
suites, in Peters' view.
"Although mankind has engaged in urban combat from the sack of Troy
to the siege of Sarajevo, Western militaries currently resist the
practical, emotional, moral and ethical challenges of city fighting....
The U.S. military must stop preparing for its dream war and get down
to the reality of the fractured and ugly world in which we live - a
world that lives in cities."
> It is exactly when human beings believe they are safe that
> they behave in the reckless fashion that brings on the
> danger that they most fear. Are we, right now, engaging in
> that kind of reckless carelessness? I think we are.
>
> Alan Keyes, April 2, 1999
_
Rob Robertson