Forums: Discussions for entrepreneurs and small business.

The way we treat our veterans says volumes about our country. Yesterday at 1pm, I attended a conference call with the Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Those who took part in the conference were, without a doubt, committed to helping veterans and their families.

Acting Director Stephen Dillard outlined where the new Administration was headed, and touched upon the efforts of the Bush Administration in the establishment of faith-based organizations. Under the leadership of former Director Darin Selnick, the effort to support our veterans was a cooperative, collective effort shared by faith-based and community organizations.

Still, we find our veterans homeless, out-of-work and struggling for health benefits. We are living in a country that talks about how proud we are of our men and women in uniform, while failing to put our words into effective action on their behalf.

Our men and women in uniform represent the ultimate in selfless sacrifice. They volunteer to serve and do so with pride and courage. Our country often takes them for granted, forgetting who is prepared and ready at a moments notice to defend our countrymen without distinction of political affiliation, religion, race, gender or creed.

The care of our veterans is a moral obligation of the American people. We can not expect the government or the Veteran`s Administration to do it all. We must do our part as well.

There is no doubt that we tend to get wrapped up in the events of the day. Whether our day races by with work, family or recreation, it is easy to put-off doing that which we know is our duty. We can always do something. Whether it is sending a card to a soldier serving overseas, simply thanking them for their service, or sending a care package. Whether we send an extra cellphone or calling card to a soldier so they can call home, or we volunteer some of our time at the local V.A. or a faith-based or community outreach to help a veteran...WE CAN DO SOMETHING. To paraphrase my dear friend and a true `Citizen Leader`, Darin Selnick, "We must do something for those who wrote a blank check for our liberty."

And do something, we must. God shed his grace on thee, but not without the sacrifice of millions of Americans who have worn the uniform of the United States Armed Services.

There is always a veteran who we can thank or salute when we meet them. They are all around us and the opportunity always exists.

Let us remain sensible of our moral obligation to our veterans, as a nation and as Americans who are free. To our veterans and to those who continue to serve our nation, we salute your efforts, your sacrifice and your courage.

-Will Griffith, Chairman
  The Griffith Corporation
   HOMELAND TV
   AMERICAN WARRIOR TV
   www.griffithcorp.com
   888-828-5355



-------------------------

Will Griffith
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL

Dear Mr. Layte,

The job of a soldier, especially that of a volunteer force, is to protect the interests of national security. We differ on our perception of what lies were told. We can disagree over the merits of our intervention in Iraq (of which I support and continue to support) and can even disagree on the moral obligations to go to war to protect liberty and the security of a nation.  The purpose of my post was in specific reference to our job as Americans to provide for our men and women in uniform.

I appreciate your position, though I disagree. It is such dialogue that makes one take a step back and inventory their position closer. Your response is, indeed, thought provoking and not without merit.

For whatever reasons we were given with regard to invading Iraq, and whether or not we should have toppled Saddam Hussein`s regime, will be debated as the history of this period is written.

War is, indeed, a necessary tool. It was war that founded this country as an independent nation from Britain. It was a civil war that kept the union in place and it is war that continues to be used as both an evil and as a tool for a better future around the world.

One would have to define weapons of mass destruction for me in this case. We witnessed thousands upon thousands of Kurds murdered through mustard gas and biological weapons. This is not mass destruction? We witnessed the brutality of a regime that threatened life and and prospect of liberty for an entire nation. Perhaps we should not have gone into Iraq. What then? If we had listened to the pleas and warnings prior to World War II, millions upon millions of Jews would have been spared the horrors of the holocaust ( which, the President of Iran continues to deny ever occured). Preemptive warfare and political action is a tool for a greater good. In the case of Iraq, they defied U.N. Resolutions and repeated warnings  from the Bush, Clinton and Bush Administrations.

So Mr. Layte, while I appreciate your position and respect your response, I disagree with you about the moral merits of war. It has allowed our country, as well as those allies who have called for our assistance, to preserve liberty and freedom for future generations. If it were not for the military might of the United States, our European brothers and sisters  would being doing the goose-step today.

With regard to our intelligence operatives, I would say mistakes have been made throughout history, but the record in the War against Terror stands on its own merits. We have not had another attack on our soil since 911. Thank God and the men and women who serve this nation.

Vietnam, though the objectives were valid, failed because the Washington political elite refused to let the military commanders do their job. I am glad to see that President Barack Obama has a sense of history and has not repeated that mistake in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

Again, thank you for your response and I salute you for standing by the courage of your convictions. While we may disagree, I appreciate the time you took to express your views.

Will Griffith, Chairman
The Griffith Corporation
HOMELAND TV NETWORK
www.griffithcorp.com



-------------------------

Will Griffith
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL

 Dear Bob:

I would not presume to speak for former President Bush on the matters of the WMD`s. You have a valid point concerning what he may have meant by Weapons of Mass Destruction.

What I would consider weapons of mass destruction were evident to me, long before President Bush became chief executive.

President Bill Clinton, Vice President Al Gore, Mrs. Albright and Mrs. Clinton have all agreed on the WMD perception I lean toward.

Again, thank you for the dialogue on the matter.

Will Griffith



-------------------------

Will Griffith
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL

Bob, my friend-in-debate:
One thing I appreciate is healthy debate. You are correct in citing Colin Powell in the core of your position. However, biological weapons CAN reach the United States, as every national security expert has agreed (even Gen. Powell). The threat of biological and nuclear weapons, are a constant concern for our intelligence community. The fact that the delivery of those weapons may be unconventional does not diminish the threat. Airliners were used as WMD`s, and in dealing with the the terrorist mindset, nothing is off limits.

After 911 we were dealing with terrorism in a new way. Al Qaeda verbally declared war on the United States, the Islamo-fascists got behind Bin Laden in his rhetoric and we had to face a new era where new tactics and a new kind of warfare was instituted. I did not intend to create a climate in my post where I excuse the mistakes made by the Bush Administration. What I do contend is that he did what no president successfully did with the terrorists before him (Republican or Democrat). He answered the battle cry and went on the offensive. History, indeed, will vindicate him for doing what every president who takes the oath is bound by constitutional law to do...support and defend the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. I have every confidence that our 44th President will deal with the war against terror, which includes state-sponsored terrorism, in a fashion that will keep us strong and unafraid.

Barack Obama deserves the support of the American People, regardless of political affiliation, in matters of national security. Perhaps he will conduct the foreign policy of the nation in a manner that provides better security for the nation. Perhaps he will learn from the mistakes of the past to provide better tools for intelligence and our military. He has my faith and my prayers daily.

Bob, I understand your position. I do. I also understand you to be a good American, perhaps disappointed by the mistakes and decisions of Washington, but an American who loves and cares for his country. In light of this, I appreciate our dialogue and I appreciate the fact that you remain steadfast to your beliefs and principles. This is more of what Washington needs.

I believe semantics can often flood a debate such as this. I find myself as guilty as my opponent in a healthy debate.

My original statement that the care of our veterans is a moral obligation remains unwavering, and on this I believe we can all agree.

Will Griffith



-------------------------

Will Griffith
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL

Hi again Will,

Hello Bob:

This would be really fun if we were on the golf course! I do not consider you confrontational at all, rather secure in your position and voicing it well.

To be fair, we blew the Osama bin Laden factor under Clinton. Lt. Col. Robert "Buzz" Patterson (USAF, ret.), who was in charge of carrying the nuclear football for President Clinton, has openly outlined how and why President Clinton was "unavailable" and missed a golden opportunity to take out Bin Laden long before September 11, 2001. Today, we know why the President was "unavailable". Regardless, there is plenty of blame to go around with regard to bin Laden.

Afghanistan should have remained more centralized in the war on terror. It should have remained a primary focus and because mistakes were made the Taliban has reemerged in full bloom. But Iraq was a necessary military action as well.  George Herbert Walker Bush, William Jefferson Clinton and President Bush all agreed that Iraq posed a direct threat to the national security of the United States on a variety of levels.

Israel has been and remains our primary ally in the Middle East. While Saudi Arabia is considered an ally, it is a reluctant relationship of diplomacy we utilize while remaining on guard. The geographical position of Iraq is unique. Because of this position and the unpredictable and erratic behavior of Saddam Hussein, he had to be removed. The primary threats in that region, in my opinion, are Iran and Syria.  Jordan remains an ally and Israel remains the focus of Imperial-theocratic agendas of men who declare that the Jewish state must be blown-off the map. From this position alone, the war in Iraq is justified in my opinion.

Take into account the human rights atrocities committed by the Hussein regime and couple that with his warnings and statements to the United States, including the assassination plot of George H.W. Bush (which was met with airstrikes by President Clinton, to his credit), and the war has additional footing.

Then, let us look at the evidence (also presented by the United Nations Security Council) concerning Iraq`s refusal to honor United Nations resolutions and regional treaties. Kuwait was only one example. Non-cooperation with U.N. inspectors was another. The mad man had to go! And go he did.

While I believe an exit strategy is warranted and that it is long overdue for the Iraqi people to do the heavy lifting to keep their new found democracy, I believe that the Iraqi people are better off today, they are a young, struggling democracy and they have a future they would have otherwise not had due to the decision to intervene in Iraq.

FDR was a brilliant President for a time of war. His relationship with Winston Churchill literally saved Britain and the United States from the domination of the Axis. 

With regard to Hussein`s iron fist and whether or not he would tolerate an entity such as Al Qaeda, I agree. It was all about his power and his regime. We do know that Hussein used Al Qaeda and other Islamic fundamentalist splinter groups to plot the assassination of former President George H.W. Bush. So he used those factions when it suited him. Qadaffi is a similar dictator in the mold of Hussein. He has grown more cooperative since Hussein`s overthrow and execution.

Whatever the case, exchanging this dialogue with you has been thought provoking and indeed worthwhile. I urge you to always remain steadfast in what you believe in your heart and continue to support the very best elements of our country. We are a diverse people with diverse and varied ideas. In the end, we are united in our love and passion for America, her history and the preservation of our liberty.

With Best Wishes,
Will Griffith



-------------------------

Will Griffith
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL