Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

June 23rd, 2006, 10:48 am #1

Friday, June 23, 2006


By: Alan Stang

Suggested Items to Buy

The Raid

Benjamin F. Schemmer

The Framework of Operational Warfare (Operational Level of War)


... Matched by Shinola

First let me present my credentials. I have written considerably for more than thirty years about our Prisoners Of War left behind in Southeast Asia by Nixon and Kissinger. I have done what I could to expose the treason that abandoned them. I have demanded that the District of Criminals go back in and get them. I have lectured without pay about the war before brainwashed college audiences screaming for my head, while pusbag Communists made thousands for screaming obscenities on the subject in the same auditoriums.

One of my sons served eight years in the Corps, including
Iraq. My hats are bedecked with the Marine Corps logo, the e.g.a. (eagle, globe and anchor). One of my novels, Perestroika Sunset, is a hymn to the abandoned POWS who still wait for us to bring them home. It is a hymn to the Marine Corps.

Some readers tell me they finish it in tears, knowing that some of those men are still alive. The last line of the novel says that as long as boot camp classes silently stride across the parade deck at San Diego for graduation, the republic will endure. Is that enough? Do I qualify to speak?

I believed that the Corps was one of the few remaining reservoirs of Americanism, of the values that made the nation we became. But now I ask whether I was wrong. Is the Corps gone as well? Recently, we saw military families – Marine families – combat veterans, demonstrating at Pendleton against the Corps. I don’t remember whether such a thing has ever happened.

Eight men are confined to the brig – seven Marines and a Navy corpsman – not coddled like the Muslim maniacs at Gitmo. They were even shackled in their cells until public outrage forced the Corps to stop. They haven’t even been accused of anything; but their battalion commander thinks that maybe they killed a native in Iraq, in a separate incident from Haditha.

Why does he think that? Because some Iraqis say so. That’s right. Apparently, the only “witnesses” to what “happened” are relatives of the deceased. Because of that uncorroborated say-so, our fighting men were shackled. Compare the media treatment of this non-event to the media non-treatment of the two soldiers who were kidnapped, castrated, decapitated and dismembered. The vomit bags barely mentioned it and moved on.

Before this, we had Marine Lieutenant Ilario Pantano, who could have faced the death penalty for shooting two Iraqis. Of course there have been many other incidents involving the Army. Lt. Col. Allen West scared an Iraqi so much by firing a .45 round near him that he told Col. West what he needed to protect his men. West faced jail and the loss of his pension. Only the usual public outrage saved them both.

What the Smirk W. Bush Administration is doing is exactly what the Communists would do had they wormed their way into clandestine control of the federal government. Ask yourself what secret Communists would do differently. The administration is doing everything it can to demoralize our troops. And remember that this policy of demoralization is Bush’s policy.

It is what he wants. How do we know? We know because if C-in-C (Commander-in-Chief) Smirk were to pick up the phone and say, “Stop this at once!” it would stop at once. Smirk pretends to support the military, pretends be fighting “terror,” but is coordinating these attacks on our men. He won’t make that crucial call any time soon.

This is worse than Vietnam. How many “atrocities” can you name from that war? Probably only one, correct? My Lai. Lieutenant Calley. Remember? In Iraq we have many and they are better orchestrated. We have déjà Vietnam all over again, but this makes Vietnam look like a minor accident, a mistake.

What will this policy do to the Marines? Would you join a military that you know is refusing to win, that won’t do what victory requires? Would you join a military that is spoiling for an excuse to stab you in the back, a military that gives the benefit of the doubt to the men you are fighting? I would not. When that understanding percolates through the ranks and through the population, I wonder how many would share my dismay.

My son was planning to make a career in the Corps. He was promoted to Staff Sergeant Select but left in disgust because of what we have been talking about. The generals know what is happening; many disapprove, but, while the young men are maimed and killed, the generals nod agreement for fear of hurting their careers. The Corps now employs flacks to justify the Smirk policy, and they do as good a (snow) job as Tony Snow.

How did the District of Criminals handle military morale during World War II? That war was the last the Communists in Washington supported, but Roosevelt did not depend only on the universal support he had manufactured with his attack on Pearl Harbor. He spent considerable time, energy, money and personnel reinforcing that popularity, and suppressing any revelations that would tend to discourage.

Hollywood made war movies. The U.S.O. made doughnuts. Bob Hope made wisecracks on U.S.O. tours. The Office of War Information, riddled with Communists and run by Elmer Davis from the Communist Broadcasting System, made “information.” The tobacco companies sent thousands of smokes. Little was left to chance. It was almost impossible to get any other opinion. Compare all that to the morale situation in the present war. Again, Smirk W. Bush wants the present wasteland of demoralization. If he didn’t, it would not exist.

I was wrong. The ranks of graduates are still coming across the parade deck at San Diego, despite which the republic is collapsing. In fact the sight of those graduates can blind the people to what is happening. We now have the paradoxical situation in which you can only fight for America outside the military. Inside the military you will be forced without recourse to participate in an endless array of treasonous campaigns, and, while you do so, the traitors who command are sniping at your back.

Consider that while every nation has suffered the treason of traitors, no nation in history has suffered it so long by so many. In “normal” treason, a government is penetrated by traitors who steal secrets. In our case, that penetration is so complete; the government itself has become the traitor. Treason has utterly consumed it. Please prove me wrong.

Serious commentators often compare us to Rome. The comparison is apt; there are many similarities: the moral rot, the destruction of the Republic in favor of the Empire, the demagoguery, etc. One decisive difference certainly is the fact that Rome did not destroy itself deliberately. Yes, it fell from within, but it was not pushed. Our country was. Treason – the government – is conspiring to destroy it.

So, I believe that a decision to join the military these days requires even more thought than it usually does. Remember Army Specialist Michael New, officially commended again and again – until he was kicked out and disgraced for refusing to wear UN insignia and beret. Remember the questionnaire in which U.S. Marines at both 29 Palms and LeJeune were asked whether they would fire on Americans who refused to surrender their guns. The Corps tried to deny it, but that was a real test.

Word now arrives that the Corps has elected to charge the eight men with the murder of an Iraqi. Here is a question I have not seen asked. If they are guilty as charged, if other Marines are guilty as charged with the massacre at Haditha, why are today’s Marines apparently so different from their World War II ancestors whose escutcheon is unstained?

Part of the answer no doubt is house-to-house combat. I was wrong again when I fell for Smirk W. Bush’s stupid, political aircraft carrier pronouncement that the mission had been “accomplished,” which dispelled my forebodings about house-to-house combat. I celebrated. The war had been won without it!

Of course events later proved I had been wrong to believe I had been wrong. The war had not started yet. What Smirk said was the war was just the two sides taking up positions. House-to-house combat is the war and when you fight that way, you will have atrocities. They are inevitable. There is no way to conduct house-to-house combat without them.

In fact, house-to-house warfare is an atrocity. The only difference between World War II and today is that news of the inevitable atrocities in World War II was suppressed, because that was a war the conspiracy for world government fought to win. The conspirators certainly did not give the Wehrmacht and imperial Japan the benefit of the doubt.

Harry Truman allegedly said with some annoyance something to the effect that Marine Corps “propaganda is better than Stalin’s.” But remember that our magnificent military won in Vietnam and lost in Washington. The Corps survived that defeat, but now the conspirators, not content merely with another military defeat, are trying to destroy it. After 231 years, can the Marine Corps survive these latest attacks?

"Published originally at : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."

Mail this article to a friend(s) in two clicks!

Alan Stang has been a network radio talk show host and was one of Mike Wallace's first writers. He was a senior writer for American Opinion magazine and has lectured around the world for more than 30 years. He is also the author of ten books. Go to to read about Alan Stang's blockbuster new novel, He, about the greatest hero of all time, Jesus Christ.

If you would like him to address your group, please email what you have in mind. He is a regular columnist for Ether Zone.

Alan Stang can be reached at:

We invite you to visit his website at:

Published in the June23, 2006 issue of Ether Zone.
Copyright © 1997 - 2006 Ether Zone.

We invite your comments on this article in our forum!

R.W. "Dick" Gaines
GnySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952 (Plt #437)--'72
GyG's Globe and Anchor! --Sites & Forums
GyG's Old Salt Marines Tavern ~Interactive~
Gunny G's Globe and Anchor Weblog