|What is a Pharaoh of
Terrorism? Where does he or she obtain the Divine Right to
enslave and punish innocent people? Who is the worst
Pharaoh of Terrorism, Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein?
And most importantly, how can a Pharaoh of Vigilance protect the
rights of the children, and the children's children's children?
Wednesday--November 13, 2002—Ground
Zero Plus 427
Pharaoh Of Terrorism
Returns To Center Stage
Editor, New York City Combat Correspondent News
GROUND ZERO, New York
City, Nov. 13 --The Pharaoh of Terrorism has returned to center stage
at the Theater of Conflict. And he's mad he's been upstaged.
He's demanding the Terrorism spotlight shine on him before the final curtain
The scene is simple. On a
bare stage stand Saddam Hussein and President George W. Bush. They
crouch in a face-off position, angled slightly so the audience can see
their grim faces. Each wears a gun holstered to his hip. In the
background wafts the theme music from High Noon. A backdrop shows the sun
rising. A clock tics, moving the hands toward 12 noon.
It is the Third Act in a
climactic Three-Act Play pitting Vigilance against Terrorism.
The audience is anxiously poised on the
edges of their chairs, = waiting to see who will draw his weapon
first--Saddam or 'Dubbya'? As both actors' fingers twitch, a
hush descends over the Theater of Conflict. It is so quiet you could hear a
pressure-release booby-trap pin go "twwwannng" as you stepped
Suddenly, bursting out from the
theater wings, a gaunt, worn figure
stumbles onto center stage. His long scraggly bearded face is drawn,
his six-foot-four-inch body emaciated. A pallor robs his face of color; he emits a
zombie-like aura. His sandals flop noisily as he clomps into the
center-stage right. Histrionically, he shoves his hands high above his head, waving long,
delicate fingers at the jaw-slackened audience. His Voice crackles
as it pierces the shocked silence.
"Wait...wait....this is my
play....you can't have a showdown without me....I'm the Pharaoh of
Terrorism. I'm the star...not Saddam.... Wait!
Lend me your ears....and your children...I am Osama bin Laden. I am the super star of
Terrorism, not Saddam."
Upstaging Saddam and taking credit as
the Master of Terrorism seems to be the strategy behind the recently
released audio tape broadcast yesterday (Nov. 12-02) by Al Jazeera, the
Arab satellite television channel.
Alleging the Voice to be that of Osama bin Laden,
Al Jazerra officials aired the four-minute diatribe in which bin Laden
praised the current Terrorist attacks in Russia and Bali and said they
were "merely a reciprocal reaction to what Bush, the modern-day pharaoh,
did by murdering our children in Iraq and what Israel, the ally of
America, did in bombing houses of the elderly, women and children in
Palestine, using American planes."
The CIA is reviewing the tape to match bin
Laden's Voiceprint, suspecting it might be a fake.
Bin Laden's emphasis on attaching the word
"pharaoh" to President Bush comes from Koranic texts. The
profess that the fall of the pharaoh is considered the fate of arrogant
leaders who think their own power equals God's.
U.S. officials are pondering the veracity
of the tape because al Qaeda appears to be regrouping. Intelligence
reports indicate a resurgence of activity, implying bin Laden's cells
are preparing for new assaults. On the tape, the
Voice alleged to be bin Laden, stoked the fires of al Qaeda resentment
against the West: "For how long will fear, massacres, destruction,
exile, orphanhood and widowhood be our lot, while security, stability and
joy remain yours alone? As you kill, you will be killed, as
you raid, you will be raided."
With just two days left on the
ultimatum for Saddam Hussein to vow to allow weapons inspectors into his
country or face military action by the United States to force Iraqi's
disarmament, the bin Laden tape appears to be a wrench in the spokes of
America's current single-focus anti-Terrorism policy targeting Hussein.
Over the last number of months, the Bush
administration has shifted its crosshairs from Afghanistan to Baghdad and
drawn a bull's-eye around Saddam Hussein's heart since Osama bin Laden
disappeared from sight nearly a year ago.
Suddenly, in the midst of the
Third Act, American combat policy has
two targets to deal with.
The spotlighting of bin Laden
on the "eve of destruction of the evil axis" seems orchestrated to
confuse American efforts to surround Hussein as the
"Pharaoh of Terrorism." Over the past twelve months
the "hunt for bin Laden" evaporated as the quest to corral Saddam
But the presence of Osama bin Laden's new threat puts a fly in the
ointment. America's flanks are now vulnerable to bin Laden, forcing the U.S. to
focus from one to two main Terror targets.
Whether it's a ruse or
true that bin Laden is alive and in charge is not the issue at the moment.
Confusion is. America cannot afford to discount the threats issued
by the recording.
Since the War on
Terrorism was launched specifically against Osama bin Laden post Nine
Eleven, with the
secondary target being Saddam Hussein, the question now is will America
swivel its guns back to Osama or continue a major effort to quash Hussein?
There can be no question
that Osama bin Laden is the most immediate threat. He has proven his
thirst to attack America and kill innocent people and then boast about it.
Saddam Hussein, on the other hand, is a seething threat, one that has not
yet percolated upon American soil. If a mother were to
decide who should be the priority, I'm sure she would vote for bin Laden--an accused killer of American citizens.
In contrast, the
Hussein issue is still far from a clear and present danger to our homeland
security. The Iraqi leader has not attacked America directly--yet! He has
not wantonly killed Americans on homeland soil. He is not
threatening our children as Osama's Voice did on the tape. Even
though Hussein may serve as a far graver long-term
threat, his swords have not yet pierced the belly of Americans here at
home as Osama bin Laden has.
Osama is still the most
wanted man in America.
When we demonized him for killing so
many innocent people and placed a $25 million reward on his head--dead or
alive--we gave him "Super Terrorist" status. To ignore him now would suggest our strategy had been from the
beginning to use Osama as a conduit to Hussein. If his recent Osama tape is
proved valid, to ignore him as an immediate priority would weaken our position as the
"Pharaohs of Vigilance," Terrorism's policemen.
Strategically, the presence of the audio
tape is a masterful chess play by those who want to muck up American
justification for attacking Iraq. I'm sure President Bush is
pulling at his hair, and war planners are scrambling to get out the maps
on Afghanistan that were replaced by ones for Iraq. I also wonder if
the Conspiracy Thinkers are suggesting the tape was planted by the CIA,
just in case Hussein buys the inspection deal so the War On Terrorism can
continue to flamed. It would be a good back-up plan to keep the
world's focus on Terrorism.
Of course, there are real
life-threatening issues boiling
in the Terrorism cauldron. Let's not forget North Korea's recent
admission of developing nuclear strike capabilities or the Chechen
Terrorists in Russia. It seems the Serpents of Terrorism are slithering
all over the globe; stepping on any one of their heads only means another
will slither up and bare its fangs in yet another place, perhaps forcing us to
straddle so far and stretch our resources so that one can bite our exposed
groin. It's not a pretty political picture for the lion to be
surrounded by packs of hungry hyenas.
U.N. fence riders
teetering on giving the US authorization for military action against Iraqi
if it doesn't comply with weapons inspection might take the new tape to mean
that America should return its focus back to Osama and stave off its
muscle against Iraq. The argument can easily be made that
until the immediate threat is resolved--Osama bin Laden--it isn't
efficient or justified to attack the impending threat--Iraq. Since
no direct links between Iraq and al-Qaeda have been confirmed, the
argument for putting Osama back on the front burner and Saddam on the back
one has sound logic. It also derails all the hard work the
Administration to convince the world that Saddam is really
Osama's Father--the real Pharaoh of Terrorism.
The situation reminds me of the
television show, What's My Line, where four contestants sit and all allege
to be the same person. The panel asks questions and tries to figure
who the real "Osama bin Laden" is. Duping the panel is the
But there is an overriding issue in
this play. It is: "Who are the real Pharaohs of Terrorism and
Vigilance?" And, "Where do they get their power?"
By definition, a "pharaoh" is a
divine leader, appointed by God to rule in His behalf. The first
pharaoh was Sanakhte (c. 2686-2668 B.C.). Pharaohs were
alleged to be reincarnations of Horus, the son of the sun god Re.
They ruled through slavery and oppression, thus the reference by bin
Laden's "Voice" that President Bush falls into those "arrogant" ranks
of "lordship" over the world.
Moses led the uprising that freed the
Jews from slavery in Egypt and even negotiated with God on their behalf.
One could suggest that Osama bin Laden is attempting to claim a similar role in modern history as the man who parted the Red Seas of the 21st
Century to free Muslims of Western oppression and slavery.
Moses Parts the
The reappearance of Osama bin Laden is
also a reminder that the ultimate Pharaohs of Vigilance are the children, and the
children's children's children.
If there is a "divine right" of
leadership in this world, it must be vested in the innocent, the vulnerable,
and not in the
adults who can be corrupted by their own righteousness. Power-hungry adults
tend to swerve around universal duties and responsibilities in a quest to
further specific political, ethnic, religious, or social agendas at the
expense of a much greater omnipotent duty--to preserve the safety and
security of all the children, regardless of political, social, ethnic,
religious or social agenda.
American democracy was originally
formed on the principle that each individual in a society is in charge of
his or her destiny. The idea of "divine rule" that subjected
citizens to obedience of the monarchy and "nobles" was repulsive to the architects of American
That one should be "governed" by
another because the nobles believed the average person did not have the ability or
scope to govern himself or herself, drove American revolutionists to force
the British from their new-claimed soil. In the place of "divine
leadership," America establish a Constitutional government
"of, by and for the people." All power was vested in the
people--the mothers, fathers, grandparents, cousins, uncles, aunts, and
children. Power was granted upwards from the grass roots of society to elected officials whose
sole purpose was to represent
their views. The three branches of government--Executive,
Legislative and Judicial-- were created to maintain balance so that a
Pharaoh could not rise above the people, or claim divinity over them.
The goal of
Constitutional government was ultimately designed to protect the power and
rights of the children. It was to insure the "Rights of Man and Woman" would never fall into the hands of
adults who might be inclined to serve their immediate needs of power
brokering and self-gratification, but instead be preserved in the grasp of the
unborn children, the future generations. The word "constitution"
includes this definition: The aggregate of all one's inherited physical
qualities; the aggregate of the vital powers of an individual, with
reference to ability to endure hardship, resist disease, etc.; as, a
Such aggregate power was based on the Vigilance necessary to do the "right thing for the future generations.
The "right thing" would be those actions that preserved their Liberty of
future generations and their right of self-government and
Constitutional framers were
adept at knowing the dangers of power. They knew adults think more about
protecting their present agendas than in protecting their children's
children's children's agenda.
Daily, we see certain rights of the
children being altered, shaved, chipped at to resolve immediate issues.
The rights to privacy, the rights to free speech, free movement, the
rights to dissent are all under review and question to combat Terrorism. New laws are being passed
in the frenzy of Terrorism's looming shadow, sometimes with little question or challenge to
their long-range effects on the children's, children's children.
Fear, Intimidation and Complacency expedite political agendas that
endanger these rights. The changes are usually cloaked in the shrouds of national
"now" becomes more important than protecting "then," we risk turning
blind eyes to the impact upon our children's rights as we rush to smash Terrorism.
Osama's reappearance has driven a
spike into our dash toward being a Pharaoh of Vigilance.
His message forces us to reexamine the price of the
War On Terrorism. Do we turn and resume attacks on Osama? Or,
do we press forward on Hussein? And, can we justify radical
Constitutional shaving to win a war that has no face?
It makes me wonder if our
the price of endangering our children's children's Constitutional
rights is worth the heads of Osama
It also motivates me to insist that
our government include in all its decision making a process of
I maintain that unless we ask this
critical "Generational Security Question" regarding all our foreign and domestic policies,
we are at risk of becoming our own Pharaohs of Terrorism. The
question is: "What impact does this decision have on the sovereign
rights of our children's
Security decisions further future
rights by at least 51 percent, then it is a good decision. But if
they endanger those rights by 51 percent, then it's
back to the drawing tables.
And what are those "children's
They are the same ones listed in the
U.S. Constitution. They are the rights of self-government, that no
government should be larger than the individual, and when it approaches
that critical mass, it must either be reduced or replaced by the people.
We must never forget that the
Declaration of Independent--the Right to Revolt--stands above the
Constitution in authority. No law shall be made to restrain
the Liberty of the people, and such Liberty is a divine grant, not a
Thomas Paine's Rights of Man
the Bible for children's rights. The Constitution is the Ten
Commandments. And the Declaration of Independence is the Shield of
Vigilance overriding everything below it.
Finally, the Pledge of Vigilance is our Bill
of Children's Rights. It charges adults to preserve and protect
the children from Terrorism's harm--not just physical, but emotional Terrorism as
well. Its goal is to eliminate the Terrorism of Fear,
Intimidation and Complacency placed upon a child by his or guardian or by society. The tools of Guardianship are
Courage, Conviction and Right Actions to the benefit of future
When we bestow such
rights upon children, we take away our adult divine rights of selfishness and give them to our
children, and to all children. The Liberation of the enslaved by
Moses was a symbol of returning divine rights back to those who were its
rightful owners. It was a selfless act, for it transferred power
from the vulnerable to the innocent.
As we grow into adults, we try
and capture the divine rights we had as children, or, as some do, to
collect the power we didn't have as children in retaliation to an abused
The danger in acquiring power is that
it becomes self-serving. We delude ourselves into thinking
less about the rights of the children's children's children and more about
protecting and expanding our own individual rights. Adult
rights are selfish, self-centered rights. They appear in such
forms as the "right to an abortion," or the "right to not vote," or the
"right to be complacent," or the "right to lead others
anywhere I want to lead them. In ultimate form, they include the
right to abuse a child, the right to kill another, the right to be God!
When we act in such ways, we become Pharaoh's
of Terrorism. For every right we exercise that is selfish, must be taken
from the bundle of rights born to a child. The more we
subtract those rights from the children, the more vulnerable they are to
the Terrors of the world--to feeling unloved, uncared for, unappreciated,
neglected, abused. As they grow up under the Pharaoh of
Terrorism, they learn that selfishness is the key to power. "Getting
my share or more than my share," dominates their thinking.
Pharaoh's of Terrorism. Their measure of life is always: "What's in it for
me?" rather than a Pharaoh's of Vigilance measure--"What's in it for the
children's children's children?"
Children at War
Hussein and Osama bin Laden are prime examples of Pharaohs of Terrorism.
Both have taken the divine right of leadership and imposed it on children.
And President Bush?
If he is thinking in terms of the children's children's children, then his
strategy to eliminate the weapons of mass destruction from Saddam
Hussein's grasp is the priority. Osama becomes a red herring in the
equation, a dangerous one of course. And one to be reckoned with.
But Hussein's history of using
lethal weapons of mass destruction on innocent women and children as he
did the Kurds, represents a willingness to exercise the Pharaoh's
Terroristic Power far beyond the current capacity that Osama has.
And since the United States has
no interest in conquering its enemies and ruling them and their
children, the odds are that President Bush's goal is to protect the
children's children's rights of Iraq to live under self government rather
than despotic or tyrannical leadership.
So Osama bin Laden may
not after all is said and done have mucked up the works as much as he
might have planned. In fact, for those employing Vigilant Thinking,
his presence in the 11th hour may offer a codification of America's moral
duty to neutralize Saddam Hussein's Pharaohship of Terrorism.
But there is the ever present
danger that Americans may forget their duty to manage the growth of
Pharaohs in their own land. To protect themselves from
abdicating their rights of self-government, they should demand
Generational Decisions by government--"How is this decision to the benefit of my children, my loved
ones, and the world's children's children's children?"
And how can we ask the government,
our leaders, to do something we haven't yet done?
It's like asking our children to not do what we do, but to do
what we say.
To codify the demand for Generational
Decisions by government, we, the citizens, need first make them
in our own homes, in our own lives. When we are
faced with constitutional decisions over "what's right
or what's wrong," we can pause and ask the same question
we demand of our leaders: "How will the decision
improve and protect the rights of the children's children's
If we can't find a benefit to
the future generations, then we are probably morally off track
and need to find our way back to the starting point.
The guide for Generational Decision
making is the Pledge of Vigilance. Download it.
Read it. Live by it.
Whether you're the janitor sweeping
out the office building, the CEO of a major company, or the
President of the United States, the Principles of the Pledge
of Vigilance offer all users the same ability--to become Pharaohs
of Vigilance rather than of Terrorism.
And, what about Osama bin Laden?
Well, maybe one day he'll just sit down, hold up his hands and
say, "I surrender. Give me the Pledge of Vigilance."
Apple Turns Small Town America To Fight Terrorism
- 2004, VigilanceVoice.com, All rights reserved - a