With only 18 months to go before the crucial 2004 presidential election, a series of simultaneous steps are leading to the shape of that campaign:

1) New talk – carefully leaked in DC over the weekend that the Bush Administration is now trying to undermine the Iranian Government – has many purposes. First, it is a plain fact that Tehran is the single worst supporter and backer of terrorists. Ever since the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, the Ayatollahs have caused pain and misery throughout the Middle East.

2) These Iranian leaders are accelerating their nuclear program – undoubtedly as a deterrent to any possible US military invasion. They see how easily Washington decided to take on Baghdad but how North Korea’s already-existent nuke program deterred us from even talking about a New Korean War.

3) Iran has been the sole backer of Hezbollah for two decades as that terrorist organization seized American soldiers and journalists and held them hostage; one, Colonel Higgins, was brutally tortured and killed. Hezbollah also has caused hundreds of Israeli deaths in northern Israel as they operate from southern Lebanon and Syria.

4) Iran recently shipped tons of weapons aboard ships – one of which we intercepted – to the PLO. These guns and bombs were to be used by Arafat’s thugs to kill Jews.

5) So, while we make sounds about removing the second of the three countries that comprised the Axis of Evil, Israel and the new Palestinian Prime Minister are making good progress on a Peace Agreement. This is precisely what the radicals do not want!

6) Arafat, the Ayatollahs, Osama and Assad are deathly afraid of a real settlement of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Why? Because if that contentious excuse to cause trouble is taken off the board, these Muslin extremists will have nothing to funnel their anger toward. This ongoing conflict is a perfect ‘cover’ for them to raise money, buy weapons and increase their power. But with a peace settlement, what will their cause be?

7) Israel’s hard-line Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is the perfect man to make a real peace with the Palestinians. He is Nixon going to China and Begin settling things with Egypt at Camp David. And he intends to do it.

8) All of the above plays – heavily – into next year’s presidential election. Sure, the economy here at home is the key but a calmer Middle East can only help things. And, conversely, if Iran becomes troublesome and requires more American action either in the UN or militarily, the American people will again rally to President Bush’s side. The Democrats will have trouble distinguishing themselves from the President.

9) As of now the Bush Administration has discovered a valuable tool: good policy is good politics, too. Let us hope they stick to it.


Why have our forces not yet found information about Navy Cmmdr. Michael Scott Speicher in Iraq?

Why have they ‘clammed up’ about his case?

Why has the news media, too, virtually dropped any mention of the Speicher case?

Why have we not found any WMD (weapons of mass destruction) inside Iraq after all the assurances from CIA and Colin Powell that Iraq was filled with them?

Why have we not gotten the electric power back on in Baghdad yet? Why has the greatest economic and military power ever – the USA – with the greatest technicians not been able to do this basic task in the five weeks since the war ended? Why do we risk ‘losing’ the Iraqi people by moving so slowly to get basic services back up and running?

Why do we keep changing our post-war goals, plans and administrators? Why – one day – do we say that we’re aiming for ‘democracy’ for the Iraqi people but then change our goals to say that we will run the country for a longer period of time?

Why do we risk the very real possibility that our seeming indifference and/or incompetence will allow an Iranian-style Ayatollah-led fundamentalist revolution to sweep the southern, oil-rich part of Iraq?

Why do we not realize that in a year or two the following scenario is a very real possibility: Iraq – or half of it – is run by fundamentalists who hate America and the Saudi Arabian Royal Family – with US forces out of the Kingdom - is overthrown by a pro-Osama fundamentalist force. Thus the entire oil-producing region – Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia - will be controlled by this fringe element of Islam.

Why, in light of this very plausible scenario, are we not accelerating the mass production of hydrogen-based fuel cell cars and busses and trucks?

Why have we never made the same military commitment to capture/kill Osama Bin Laden and his chief henchmen that we made to taking down Saddam’s regime? Why 200,000 troops to Iraq to fight an Iraqi army that didn’t even want to fight but only 20,000 troops to Afghanistan and virtually none into Pakistan where this radical element is fomenting?

Why do we allow Al Qaeda free reign in the southern Baluchistan region of Iran, too?

Why have we slacked the pressure off Syria and Iran despite the fact that they sponsor and host Hamas and Hezbollah?

Why do we go along with this charade of having Arafat in power and still dispatching suicide-bombers into Israel? Why don’t we get rid of him?

Why is the Bush White House still keeping secret the 600-page report on the pre-9/11 intelligence?

Why is the 9/11 commission being stalled, delayed and frustrated by the Administration?

Why is it that the biggest source of trouble – and mystery – in this Administration is inside the murky, secretive and often duplicitous world of the intelligence community?


What is the difference between Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat?

All three are murderous terrorists. All three use unspeakable acts of cruelty to hurt the United States and Israel. And all three treat their own people like pawns in their egotistical dreams to gain more and more power and bring a revolution to the Middle East.

Yet the United States – especially since 9/11 – swore off dealing with terrorists. We refused any dialogue with Saddam’s government; instead we eliminated it.

We supposedly are in a massive manhunt for Osama; certainly there is no chance of ever establishing any kind of ‘relationship’ with him or with Al Qaeda.

But Yasser Arafat – longtime devotee of suicide bombers as his main tool of disrupting the peace process with Israel – is still in power and we are dealing with him!

And this past weekend – just as Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was preparing to fly to Washington for talks – another round of Arafat-ordered suicide bombers hit Israel and the Gaza Strip. This is Arafat’s signature: whenever there is substantive progress on peace with Israel, Arafat purposively derails it with a secret order to resume the bombings.

Last year when Israel raided Arafat’s headquarters, secret tape recordings were made public of Arafat telling one of his key henchmen, "When I say to you to stop the bombing, step on the gas."

This is typical of Arafat. In September 2000 a comprehensive deal was on the table to make a lasting peace that included an autonomous Palestinian State. Israeli’s then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak and President Bill Clinton had signed off on the deal. What did Arafat do? He backed out and declared an intifada against Israel. Immediately the suicide bombing exploded all over Israel – and the deal of course fell apart.

So too did Barak’s government. Ariel Sharon – seemingly the PLO’s worst nightmare – rose to unprecedented power and popularity as the bombings spread. In other words, Arafat’s stupidity and stubbornness radicalized Israel and brought out of the ashes of history a previously unelectable Ariel Sharon.

Now, almost three years later, we again have a proposed deal – the US-sponsored ‘Road Map’ – which will result in a Palestinian State. And what does Arafat do? First he tries to block his own moderate Prime Minsiter Abu Mazen (Abbas) from taking the job. Then he tries to stop his induction by delaying the appointment of cabinet members.

When all of that fails and Secretary of State Colin Powell begins diplomatic talks with Mazen – and pointedly not with Arafat – the old PLO revolutionary reverts to form. And thus we have more bombings this weekend. Sharon’s trip to DC is canceled. The ‘Road Map’ is delayed, if not ruined.

So, we come back to the original question: why is Arafat treated with kid gloves while we tried to kill Saddam and Osama?

Clearly, as long as he is in power and on the scene, he will not allow any meaningful progress between Israel and the Palestinian people. And as long as this battle continues, it will continue to roil all of the Middle East.

Only with a true settlement of the differences between Israel and the Palestinians, can progress be made throughout the Middle East. All of the Arab nations – and their dissenters – cite the Israeli-Palestinian problem as their number one concern.

To his credit, President Bush – after ignoring this issue pre-9/11 – has woken up to the realization that we must settle this mess before anything else can happen over there.

And, in Ariel Sharon, the Arabs have another Menachem Begin: the perfect Israeli leader with which to negotiate. Why? Because only a right-wing Israeli leader can ‘sell’ a deal to his fringe elements.

Everything is in place – the US, Sharon and Mazen. But there is still one problem: Arafat.

Until he is out of the picture, nothing will change.


“I was, on the whole, considerably discouraged by my school days. It was not pleasant to feel oneself so completely outclassed and left behind at the beginning of the race.”
Sir Winston Churchill

The future Prime Minister on Great Britain - who many consider the greatest leader of the 20th century – led through his mastery of the English language. It is now acknowledged that Churchill’s impassioned speeches so convinced Hitler of the English resolve that the German dictator chose not to invade Britain.

Winston Churchill’s writings, as well, were prolific and critically acclaimed. To this day he is one of the most published authors in English history.

How ironic this all is. For we now know that Winston Churchill began life ‘behind’ because he was a dyslexic. He – like so many millions of young students – could not process letters and numbers properly and therefore felt ‘left out’ and ‘outclassed’ by his peers.

While Churchill overcame his disability through sheer determination and iron discipline, most young students can not. Instead, they soon fall into a sad status: outcasts, ‘losers,’ kids with massive inferiority complexes. They join gangs or bad groups of similarly outcast kids. Drugs, illicit sex and crime are tempting lures to kids who feel ‘left out.’

From there things can – and often do – spiral out of control: a lifetime of unhappiness can follow.

Just consider the following about dyslexics and/or students with common learning disabilities:

 62% of learning-impaired students are unemployed one year after graduation
 approximately 50% of the nation’s unemployed youth ages 16-21 are functionally illiterate, with virtually no prospect of obtaining or keeping a good job
 over 75% of current welfare recipients have very low or low reading skills
 up to 60% of adolescents in treatment for substance abuse have learning disabilities, while 85% of all juvenile offenders have reading problems
 50% of females with learning disabilities become mothers (many of them single) within 3-5 years of leaving high school
 31% of adolescents with learning disabilities will be arrested within 3-5 years of leaving high school
 as adults, over 60% of the U.S. prison population is considered technically illiterate, with at least one study pointing to over 50% of the incarcerated being dyslexic
 roughly 44% of parents who notice early signs of learning difficulty wait a year or more before acknowledging that there might be a serious problem; of these, 48% fear that having a child labeled “learning disabled” is more harmful than struggling privately with an undiagnosed learning disability, while 63% worry that such a label would have a negative effect on the child’s self-esteem (Note: these parental concerns, in turn, tend to dissuade teachers from suggesting—let alone administering—diagnostic tests)
 75% of children who do not receive proper help by the age of nine will have learning difficulties throughout life
 fewer than one-third of U.S. fourth-graders can read at grade proficiency, a statistic that has remained unchanged for the past 20 years

Just think how society – and so many lives – would be changed if dyslexia could be diagnosed at an early age and then corrected.

Edvocacy Research Corporation of Concord, Mass. – - has developed a simple software program that can diagnose this disastrous problem at an early age. And, when so diagnosed, a dyslexic child can be brought up to speed within one year with remedial teaching. At that point that child is on a par with his or her peers – and the problems listed above can be avoided.

Edvocacy’s President & CEO Geoff Cronin writes,” Very few children are tested for dyslexia or other reading disabilities, even when experience indicates a problem may be present.
 dyslexia is identifiable, with 90% accuracy, at ages 5 to 5 ½; dyslexia can be determined, with 92% accuracy at ages 5 ½ to 6 ½
 90-95% of reading-impaired children can overcome this difficulty if they receive appropriate treatment at an early age
 over 90% of children reading below the 15th percentile at the beginning of first grade read at or above grade level by the end of the first grade with appropriate intervention
 reading failure caused by dyslexia is totally preventable through direct, explicit instruction in phonemic awareness

This is one of the most exciting breakthroughs to come along in decades.

Cronin and his subordinates are on to a simple test that may revolutionize not only education – but also our entire society.

It is vital that all school systems – public, parochial and private – subscribe to Edvocacy’s testing software ASAP.

And the first political party that embraces this concept will have a powerful claim on the all-important ‘education’ issue.


The PC Leftists have done it – again!

Besides the well-documented ‘indoctrination’ that goes on in classrooms all across the country, the PC Leftists and America-haters have also taken over the content of most textbooks used in elementary and high schools.

History has been re-written to make the United States look bad and the world’s brutal regimes and ideologies look benevolent and kindly.

Perhaps the most egregious example involves the descriptions of Islam, Islamic practices and Islamic history that have been inserted into the world history textbooks that millions of American students use each year.

Gilbert T. Sewall of the AMERICAN TEXTBOOK COUNCIL has written a comprehensive report entitled Islam and the Textbooks in which he details the blatant manipulation of facts, the cover-up of barbaric behavior and the whitewash of a philosophy that advocates violent anti-American behavior.

As Sewall writes, “On controversial subjects, world history textbooks make an effort to circumvent unsavory facts that might cast Islam past or present in anything but a positive light. Islamic achievements are reported with robust enthusiasm. When any dark side surfaces, textbooks run and hide.”

Underneath this double standard is a seething leftist disdain for the United States. Sewall writes, “How classrooms deal with Islamic aggression is an unresolved school-related question of great importance. It is complicated by pressure from educational groups which assume that geopolitical problems originate in U.S. policy and its exertion of power abroad.”

While Islam withdraws into itself and ‘closes’ societies i.e. Iran, American textbooks “omit, flatter, embellish, and resort to happy talk, suspending criticism or harsh judgements that would raise provocative or even alarming questions.”

Sewall then lists off specific examples of the manipulation of descriptions:

1) Jihad: “Jihad in its historical usage refers almost exclusively to armed warfare by Muslims against non-Muslims." But, no surprise, academics distort this definition. They “deny any martial aspect of the Muslim faith, ignoring or dismissing violent Islamic jihads from Algeria to Indonesia and locating the problem in Western colonialism.”

As the noted historian Bernard Lewis wrote, “The object of jihad is to bring the whole world under Islamic law.” But “in U.S classrooms, jihad is defanged or oversimplified.” Jihad is made to look like a nice, peaceful disagreement among friends.

2) Sharia, the Islamic holy law: this is the Muslim law which supercedes all other laws, including civil and criminal laws in any nation a Muslim is inhabiting. As Lewis wrote, “the idea that any group of persons, any kind of activities, or any part of human life is in any sense outside the scope of religious law and jurisdiction is alien to Muslim thought.”

But, of course, American textbooks distort – and soften -this definition of Sharia. Littell’s Patterns of Interaction merely whitewashes it by saying Sharia “brings a sense of unity to all Muslims.”

3) Slavery: long a favorite topic of the Anti-American PC Left, they have conveniently downplayed the multi-century long practice of slavery by Muslims – which did not end until the late 19th century. Sewall writes, “As World History textbooks would have it, slavery is a Western, European and American institution.” In fact, “slavery was a central part of Islamic civilization, and it may be said that Arabs invented the African slave trade.”

4) Status of Women: American “textbooks try to explain away or recast any inconvenient detail concerning the treatment of women in the Islamic world that would be considered backward, unacceptable, or even revolting in the West.”

Sewall sums up today’s textbooks on this topic: “What is missing from world history textbooks? That Muslim women today are seen by many men to be not much more than chattel; that, for these men, women are fit to be servants and breeders; and that a wife’s autonomy is interpreted as a sign of female disobedience and disrespect.”

So, what is going on here?

Leftists who hate America are, as UCLA historian Gary B. Nash wrote, “determined to ‘redistribute historical capital’ and politicize historical content.” As Sewall adds, “textbook editors routinely adjust perspective and outlook to advance the illusion of cultural equivalency and demonstrate cross-cultural and global sensitivity.”

A wonderful example of the blatant bias comes from Shabbir Mansuri, the director of the Council on Islamic Education, who boasted that he is waging a “bloodless” revolution, ‘promoting world cultures and faiths in America’s classrooms.’

You must read Sewall’s entire report which can be located at

And we must all realize that as awful as 9/11 was, we are still under attack. Only this attack is from within our own leftist educational system. And the target is America’s youth.

W’S 2004 PLAN

With the War in Iraq over – and a total success so far - President George W. Bush has now set his sights on one goal and one goal only: to be re-elected next year.

In fact, the entire Bush Family is devoted to not repeating the first George Bush’s humiliating defeat in 1992.

By the way, all presidents want to be re-elected; this is not some new notion. But the Bush 41 and Bush 43 cases are so strikingly similar that they invite comparisons: slumping economies following a successful war over Iraq and wildly fluctuating poll ratings.

There were many lessons learned from Bush 41’s defeat following an astoundingly high 91% approval rating in the spring of 1991. But the main lesson is this: victory in war does not necessarily translate into victory at the polls.

After all, Winston Churchill – perhaps the greatest leader of the 20th century – was defeated mere months after the defeat of Nazi Germany.

This Bush White House is acutely aware of what happened to former President Bush in 1991 and 1992. They are determined that the same fates not befall them. G.W. Bush – years ago – said that “1992 was the most painful year of our family’s life.”

So, with that in mind, the Bush political operation sees a re-election victory next year as a reaffirmation of everything both Bushes have done. Conversely, another Bush defeat for re-election to the White House would be a crippling and fatal blow to the so-called Bush Dynasty.

This President Bush is doing everything possible to goose an economic recovery by pushing for his further tax cuts. He is trying to use the political capital earned from defeating Saddam Hussein on domestic affairs. Instead of sitting on his popularity – like his father did – this Bush is aggressively trying to put his stamp on the nation in a way that lets him shape the domestic agenda.

Traditionally domestic affairs are not good issues for Republicans; those issues tend to play into liberal Democrats’ hands. Health care, education, environment, unemployment benefit extensions, budget cuts and service reductions all hurt GOP candidates. Only tax cuts are a strong issue that benefits Republicans. And that is why it is the centerpiece of the Bush Economic Recovery Plan.

The problem Bush has is his own party on Capitol Hill is lukewarm about the size and scope of the new round of proposed cuts. While the White House has proposed $755 billion in tax cuts, some moderate GOPers corralled Senate Majority leader Bill Frist into agreeing to only $350 billion in cuts. The House leadership, meanwhile, wants $550 billion.

All of this is – for the moment – ‘inside baseball’ to the public. But if the economy does not pick up – and quite soon – it may become too late for the perception that the economy is improving to take hold in time for the 2004 election. That is why the Bush White House has pivoted from its war footing to its laser-like focus on the economy.

Of course there is one other factor to consider: the unexpected.

What if another cataclysmic event occurs between now and November, 2004?

What if a scandal – long simmering – begins to unravel?

Politics is life – meaning that we simply do not know and can not predict the future. All we can do is to be prepared for all possibilities.

Will Bush 43 defy his father’s fate and get re-elected? Or will he – no matter how hard he tries – follow his father into the abyss of an election he cannot win?


Did the Communist Chinese military create the SARS virus as a bio-weapon – only to see a horrific accident unleash this killer on innocent citizens worldwide?

A wise man with strong connections to US intelligence recently opined that the SARS outbreak may in fact not be a naturally forming virus. Instead, it may be a “Chinese biowar disaster” along the lines of the Anthrax release years ago in the Soviet city of Sverdlosk.

Indeed there are tantalizing clues that lead to Beijing’s secretive military establishment:

In a Wall Street Journal article from Beijing just days ago, reporters Peter Wonacott and Susan V. Lawrence report that World Health Organization (WHO) experts on the ground in China were inspecting civilian hospitals to check the level of preparation for SARS patients. During these inspections, WHO officials were denied access to Chinese military hospitals.

The Journal story claimed, “Much of the secretiveness is focused on military-run hospitals. Those hospitals report to the medical department of the general logistics department, which reports to the Central Military Commission, chaired by former President Jiang Zemin. Military hospitals have no direct bureaucratic link to the state medical system.

“A letter addressed to the WHO and written by two staff members at Beijing's No. 309 Hospital -- one of the city's military-run hospitals -- said that hospital administrators Saturday ordered large numbers of SARS patients to be transferred from No. 309 to the No. 3 Armed Police Hospital before a WHO inspection visit to No. 309 Tuesday.

"The vast majority, including particularly severe cases, were transferred out, leaving just a small number of light cases here to make due for your inspection visit," said the letter, a copy of which was seen by The Wall Street Journal.

“At the No. 3 Armed Police Hospital, which is in the Beijing suburb of Fengtai, a staff member said that the hospital is receiving transferred SARS patients and that all the clinics at the hospital have been closed to outside patients, but couldn't comment on details of patient transfers.

“An official at No. 309 Hospital said that the transfer of patients is an issue handled by the hospital's top executives and that he couldn't comment on it.”

Underneath this apparent secrecy is the strong likelihood of a massive cover-up. Why? Because the military, under China’s convoluted political system, is the ‘enforcer’ of the un-elected communist regime. And, despite new leadership in Beijing two months ago, the former President Jiang Zemin retains control over the Military Commission.

This would be analogous to former President Clinton running the Pentagon while President Bush is in the White House. Some way to run a country, eh?

Jiang – and his old-line military supporters cushy in the lifetime posts - must be desperate to keep the lid on the SARS outbreak for fear he will have the Military Commission taken away from him. Thus the cover-up: military hospitals made off-limits to WHO personnel, civilian officials afraid to talk and a riot in a small town where SARS patients were placed in yet another military hospital.

Of course, underneath this cover-up is the original crime: the possibility that SARS is the result of the People’s Republic Red Army experimenting in deadly biowar weapons.

Weapons of mass destruction and a brutal regime. Sound familiar?

And yet no one ever talks about how the Red Chinese government is the cornerstone of the real Axis of Evil.