--- Begin Message ---
<PRE>THE HOFFMAN WIRE
Dedicated to Freedom of the Press, Investigative Reporting and Revisionist History
Michael A. Hoffman II, Editor
<A HREF=" http://www.hoffman-info.com/news.html
">http://www.hoffman-info.com/news.html</A>
*******************************************</PRE>
Dec. 27, 2001
Washington Post Conservative Columnist George Will Urges Extermination
of Muslims just like Sherman did in the American South
An "Analogy between Confederate and al Qaeda Elites"
Editor's Note: I try to avoid joining the chorus of those
always-scandalized ones who are too often dismayed by the latest le choc
du moi from some neo-conservative lapdog of Ariel Sharon.
Neo-conservatives are just rabbis without yarmulkes, so it is not very
shocking when they utter some odious Likudism.
What does warrant attention and outrage however, is when "Holocaust"
pieties on the "Never Again" bandwagon are turned inside out. George
Will, conservatism's number one gentile homilist of the "Holocaust," is
here advocating the extermination of both the yeomanry of the American
South and of Muslims in Afghanistan.
Will's posturing tends to prove that incessant "Nazi Holocaust"
badgering has absolutely nothing to do with its stated intent, i.e. to
sensitize us to the horror of war and genocide, so as to ensure that
such crimes never befall any people ever again. By observing the
behavior of the most enthusiastic violin-pluckers in the Six Million
symphony, we see that in other times these professional mourners become
raging hounds of bloodthirst and --dare we say it?-- extermination.
Really now, Hoffman, you go too far. George Will may be a Zionist
sympathizer, but we have not yet reached the point in our body politic
where a leading American conservative philosopher of his stature,
advocates extermination as a weapon of war.
On the contrary, we have indeed reached the point where irony, decency
and self-examination have been extinguished in the fires of Israeli
absolutism and war madness, so that a poster-boy for Holocaustianity
--like Will -- can hold forth on the necessity of exterminating demonic
classes, creeds and ethnicities, and his call becomes part of our polite
discourse, rather than grounds for his dismissal and disgrace.
It would be comical if the consequences of Will's hate speech were not
so lethal and astonishing, in that Will not only upholds the mass murder
of Muslims, but the fratricide practiced by Union General William
Sherman, who, until recently, was nearly universally execrated for being
the first prominent American military leader to initiate attacks on
Christian civilians and to seek the genocide of the white Southern male.
Here now is venom born from a snakepit, disguised as our nation's
guiding light. Will's intended target is not only Southern secessionists
and Muslim separatists. He takes aim at all who stand for chilvary and
truth without compromise; "the best and noblest" can count on being
burned, bombed or perhaps even gassed, to the applause of those who pass
for patrician conservatives in this Year One of childhood's end.
Michael A. Hoffman II
---------------------
Gen. Sherman's Advice
By George F. Will
Washington Post, December 27, 2001; Page A23
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28476-2001Dec26.html
"I fear the world will jump to the wrong conclusion that because I am in
Atlanta the work is done. Far from it. We must kill three hundred
thousand I have told you of so often, and the further they run the
harder for us to get them." -- Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman, 1864
America's Civil War provides many analogies by which we measure -- and
sometimes misunderstand -- today's military developments, and American
ways of waging war.
Because facets of the Afghanistan operations -- real-time intelligence,
stealthy aircraft, precision munitions -- are so modern, we miss the
fact that the war requires an American tradition of warmaking that has a
19th-century pedigree. And the bloody uprisings by fanatical Taliban and
al Qaeda prisoners underscore the pertinence of Sherman's understanding
of how to define victory over an intensely motivated enemy.
When military operations in Afghanistan began, just four weeks after
Sept. 11 and three weeks after Gen. Tommy Franks was told to begin
planning attacks, some critics were quick to say the operations did not
begin quickly enough. Then they said the tempo of operations was too
torpid. Critics compared Franks -- and Colin Powell, ever mindful of
allies' sensibilities -- to Gen. George McClellan. Those were fighting
words, because McClellan was a reluctant fighter.
One of President Lincoln's commanders, McClellan was notoriously
reluctant to close with Confederate forces, the strength of which he
consistently overestimated. This drove Lincoln to distraction, and to
sarcasm about hoping to "borrow" the Army if McClellan was not using it.
Sherman, an energetic user of the Army, believed its principal use
against the Confederacy was not to occupy territory but to destroy enemy
personnel. His reason for believing this has contemporary resonance
during a war against fanatics, many of whom come from the privileged
strata of corrupt and exploitative societies.
Long before secession, Sherman despised the South for its caste and
class systems. In 1843, when stationed in South Carolina, he wrote:
"This state, their aristocracy . . . their patriarchal chivalry and
glory -- all trash. No people in America are so poor in reality, no
people so poorly provided with the comforts of life."
So why did the Confederate army, composed mostly of poor whites, fight
for a social system beneficial only to a tiny landed minority? Partly
because of the elan of its martial elite, those whom Sherman called
"young bloods" who were "brave, fine riders, bold to rashness and
dangerous in every sense."
Sherman, writes professor Victor Davis Hanson in his book "The Soul of
Battle," considered the Confederacy "a motley conglomeration of
distrustful factions." Sherman thought the really dangerous faction --
dangerous during the war, and potentially afterward -- consisted of what
Hanson calls "young zealots, men between 18 and 40 who often formed the
cavalry of the South and were led by rabid knights like Nathan Bedford
Forrest, Joseph Wheeler and Jeb Stuart. These fanatics . . . were the
children of the wealthy, excellent horsemen, full of youthful vigor and
insolence."
The South, although militarily weak, "fielded," Hanson says, "individual
warriors who were among the most gallant and deadly in the entire
history of warfare." Hence what Sherman called "the awful fact": Victory
required "that the present class of men who rule the South must be
killed outright."
Donald Rumsfeld says his preference is for al Qaeda fighters to
surrender rather than fight to the death: "It ends it faster. It's less
expensive." Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, says:
"This is not a war of extermination." Such statements are perhaps
obligatory and even sincere.
However, is surrender really less expensive in the long run? It is a
reasonable surmise that a reformed terrorist is a very rare terrorist,
and that the rate of recidivism will be high among terrorists who are
forced to surrender but continue to believe they are doing God's will
when they commit mass murder of infidels.
So, as far as is consistent with the rules of war and the husbanding of
the lives of U.S. military personnel, U.S. strategy should maximize
fatalities among the enemy, rather than expedite the quickest possible
cessation of hostilities.
Many Americans will vehemently reject any analogy between Confederate
and al Qaeda elites. But Sherman might have felt vindicated by a postwar
letter from one former Confederate general to another, D. H. Hill to
Jubal Early:
"Why has the South become so toadyish & sycophantic? I think it is
because the best and noblest were killed off during the war."
<end quote>
-----------
-----------
<PRE>Hoffman is a former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press
The HOFFMAN WIRE is a public service of Independent History and Research, Box 849,
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816 USA
24 Hour Revisionist News Bureau: <A HREF=" http://www.hoffman-info.com/news.html
">http://www.hoffman-info.com/news.html</A>
Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: The Hoffman Wire is a controversial and politically incorrect e-mail
letter intended only for those who have requested it. We have a strict anti-spamming
policy. The views expressed in the Hoffman Wire are the sole responsibility of the
author(s) and do not reflect the views of advertisers or the transmitter.
Freedom of the Press: A hallowed right.
Responsible Dissent: A contribution to understanding and dialogue.
</PRE>
<PRE>==^================================================================
This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: <A HREF=" http://topica.com/u/?a2iTuc.a2LabI
">http://topica.com/u/?a2iTuc.a2LabI</A>
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
<A HREF=" http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
">http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register</A>
==^================================================================</PRE>
--- End Message ---
