- Conservative blogger John Hawkins of Right Wing News
has now decided to join Michael Medved in a new ad hominem attack by using
a disparaging adjective to call me a name ("kooky") and placing
me No. 3 in the list of the 20 "people on the right" he finds
most annoying.
-
- Hawkins places me between No. 2 Mark Foley, whom Hawkins
characterizes as a "page-molesting pervert," and No. 4 Duke
Cunningham, the congressman Hawkins notes is "going to jail for 8
years after taking a bribe." I am honored to be included on any list
John Hawkins wishes to create. But, as far as I can determine, my offense
to Hawkins involves writing with the scope of the 1st Amendment, an offense
that Hawkins considers somewhat worse than taking bribes, but not quite
as bad as making salacious approaches to underage male employees.
-
- I first want to thank Hawkins for his continuing campaign
to draw attention to my arguments.
-
- Second, I wonder how much additional writing I will have
to produce before Hawkins reduces himself to the "liar, liar"
ranting stage Michael Medved exhibited in his recent emotional tirade
published on Townhall.com. I guess I will have to read more of Hawkins's
writing to determine if I find his views annoying, but upon introspection
I find I have no emotional reaction whatsoever, even to his characterization
that I am somehow "annoying" to him. Perhaps President Bush
drew solace that he was listed seven positions below me on Hawkins's "most
annoying" list. I apologize to President Bush that Hawkins could
not find a better pejorative for him than "incompetent." Clearly
in Hawkins's hierarchy to be "kooky" in writing a political
commentary is much more annoying to him than to be merely "incompetent"
in conducting the affairs of the nation's highest elected post.
-
- Arguing that my writings advance a "completely moronic
North American conspiracy theory," Hawkins linked to an old post
he had written on his blog last summer. In an exchange published in July
on HUMAN EVENTS' Right Angle blog, I answered these and other objections
raised by Hawkins. The exchange ended when Hawkins chose not to respond.
Hawkins has never answered my last specific rebuttals published on the
blog. Merely repeating his initial arguments would be considered "non
responsive" in traditional debate theory.
-
- Besides, I have never argued a "North American conspiracy."
The European Union and the Euro are realities today, not a conspiracy
theory. So too, North American integration is proceeding rapidly right
now, fully documented, as the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North
America attests if you reference the Department of Commerce website SPP.gov.
Equally, the Trans-Texas Corridor is proceeding rapidly, as documented
by the Texas Department of Commerce website. If either the Security and
Prosperity Partnership of North America or the Trans-Texas Corridor is
a conspiracy, the conspiracy is being perpetrated by government officials
on their public websites.
-
- We will grant that the now public writings of those who
advanced the European Union, such as the memoirs of EU intellectual architect
Jean Monnet, confess after the fact that a stealth method was pursued
to create the European Union. As Christopher Booker and Richard North,
co-authors of the 2003 book, "The Great Deception: A Secret History
of the European Union," write that Jean Monnet "knew that only
by operating in the shadows, behind a cloak of obscurity could he one
day realize his dream." Architects of North American integration,
such as Robert Pastor of American University, breathe new life into stealth
politics when suggesting openly that a new 9/11 crisis may be just the
event needed to advance his agenda for creating the "North American
Community" he openly professes.
-
- At any rate, I invite Hawkins to resume his debate with
me. To make the process easy, we will link to the exchange. Seeing that
I wrote the last rejoinder there, the next move appears to be up to Hawkins.
Is Hawkins up to calm, rational debate, or does he want to leave his
comments at the level of calumny, an ad hominem attack which always belies
an inability to win the argument any other way?
-
- My writing has been aimed at making sure that North American
integration does not advance to the point where a North American Union
emerges after what may be a decades-long incremental process. I want to
be sure that the United States does not follow the template set in place
by how the European Union and the euro emerged over some fifty years,
driven by an intellectual elite and evolving step-by- step from an initial,
seemingly innocuous continental steel and coal agreement.
-
- What is it exactly that Hawkins finds annoying-that a
NAU and the Amero could be the end result of the North American integration
currently happening, or that I might suggest the Bush Administration
could be following the Jean Monnet path intentionally?
-
- Mr. Corsi is the author of several books, including "Unfit
for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry" (along
with John O'Neill), "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity
and the Politics of Oil" (along with Craig R. Smith), "Atomic
Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians,"
and most recently, "Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America's Borders."
He will soon author a book on the Security and Prosperity Partnership
of North America and the prospect of the forthcoming North American Union.
|
