Dear Mr. President: 

Reluctantly, I did watch your interview tonight with ABC's Charlie Gibson.  While I do greatly appreciate your honesty in admitting that you were "unprepared for war," I was continually reminded of why I am so very happy that you will soon return to Crawford. 

Mostly, I was struck by your attempt to rewrite history and make it appear as though the entire world was in agreement on invading Iraq and that all the other world leaders were just as wrong in their assessment of the intelligence as were you.  Specifically, you said, "A lot of people put their reputations on the line and said the weapons of mass destruction is a reason to remove Saddam Hussein.  It wasn't just people in my administration.  A lot of members of Congress prior to my arrival in Washington DC (a tacit admission that the invasion was on the drawing board long before 9/11), during the debate on Iraq, a lot of leaders of nations around the world were looking at the same intelligence."

Yes, Mr. President, a lot of leaders around the world were looking at the same intelligence, but before you go too far down the history-revisionist road and try to put the Iraq debacle around the necks of other world leaders, remember that they certainly did not agree with your assessment of the same intelligence.  Remember, Mr. President, other world leaders actually reached the opposite conclusion when they looked at the same intelligence; they all thought that the intelligence did not present a case for war.  Don't you remember France and Germany refusing to join your war against Iraq and the people on your side of the aisle getting so mad at France for not seeing a case for war that they threatened to change the name of French fries to Freedom fries?  Remember how you defiantly said, "We'll go it alone!" in response to the fact that you couldn't even bribe other countries to go with us?  Remember how you said, "You're either for us, or against us!" when other countries implored you to wait and let the inspectors do their job?  Remember how people like Senator Russ Feingold and Senate-Candidate Barack Obama counseled you against going to war?  Remember how you dismissed any evidence that didn't support your conclusion that a war against Iraq was necessary?  Remember how your Vice-President orchestrated the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame because her husband dared to publicly question your claim that Saddam had sought yellow-cake uranium in Africa?  Remember how you morphed Osama Bin Laden into Saddam Hussein when you kept saying that the Iraq war was necessary because, "these people attacked us on 9/11...they want to hurt Americans" when you full-well knew that Saddam was not in any way connected to 9/11 and that you had planned to go to Iraq long before 9/11?   Mr. President, at the risk of being insolent, I dare say the problem wasn't an "intelligence failure" as you regretted to Mr. Gibson; the problem was your complete lack thereof.

And yes, Mr. President, you were unprepared for war.  You showed your unpreparedness when you sent American sons and daughters into a war without having proper body armor and without having properly-fortified vehicles.  You showed your unpreparedness when you didn't drill down into recent history to understand that for eight years, the United States had supplied Saddam with boat-loads of explosives and mines in their war against Iran, that they could now use against our troops.  You showed your unpreparedness when as Commander in Chief of the greatest military on the face of the earth, you had no plan whatsoever to secure these explosives immediately upon invasion.  (Tellingly, when you invaded Iraq, the only governmental office you immediately secured was the Ministry of Oil.)  You showed your unpreparedness after the invasion, Mr. President, when you allowed Saddam's arsenals of conventional weapons and explosives to be looted by the soon-to-be insurgents.  Sadly, you showed your unpreparedness by being busy declaring, "Mission Accomplished," while the insurgents were busy devising and planting the devices which would soon take the lives of 4,000 sons and daughters of America.
 
In addition to the destruction that you wrought on the United States military families and the profound suffering which you caused for untold thousands of civilian families in Iraq, you also accomplished two other things with your war against Iraq: 1.) you made Iran many-times-over stronger; and, 2.) you took your eye off of the ball and let Osama Bin Laden wax stronger and become a much greater threat than he was before 9/11.

Mr. President, Sir, you knew before your invasion of Iraq that the country was 70% Shiite.  You knew, Sir, that Saddam was Sunni and that he had an iron grip on the Shiites.  You had to know, Sir, that removing Saddam and allowing a democratic vote would necessarily mean that a Shiite government would be elected since the Shiites composed 70% of the electorate.  And you should have known, Sir, that the only other country on the face of the earth which is majority Shiite is Iran.  You had to know, Sir, that this would naturally result in an Iraqi government which would be aligned with Iran, making Iran a much greater threat to Israel and the United States than it was before your invasion.

As the recent attacks from Pakistan into India have shown, Sir, President-Elect Obama was right when he said that you had taken your eye off the ball and allowed Osama Bin Laden to grow stronger in the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan.  Contrary to the claim by people on your side of the aisle that President-Elect Obama wants to "wave the white flag of surrender" to terrorists, President-Elect Obama has said all along that we need to re-deploy our troops from Iraq, back to Afghanistan where the real terrorists have been all along.  He's not against war in general, Mr. President, he simply wants us to fight the right war. 

Mr. President, after 9/11, you had the support of the entire world to invade Afghanistan to rout-out the terrorists in the border region.  As a student of history, you knew that the British had failed to conquer this area in three separate Anglo-Afghan Wars, totaling seven years.  You knew, Sir, that the Soviet Union had miserably failed in trying to conquer this area in a ten-year war, partly because our own CIA had trained Osama Bin Laden and his followers in insurgent warfare and had loaded them up with plane-load upon plane-load of rocket-propelled grenades and shoulder-launched anti-tank missiles.  Yet, after a mere 16 months, you Sir, arrogantly decided that you had conquered Afghanistan and that you could now re-deploy the majority of our troops to Iraq.

In so doing, you gave Osama Bin Laden his greatest recruitment tool: "the immoral infidels from the West are occupying holy Muslim land so come join and fight" and his greatest training camp: "go to Iraq and learn how to fight Americans and then come back to the border region for our next conquest."  By all accounts and any measure, Sir, Osama's army of Mujahideen in the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan has grown exponentially since, and because of, your invasion of Iraq.  The Mujahideen (whom your hero Ronald Reagan referred to as "Freedom Fighters" when their enemy was the Soviet Union) now number over one million fighters and pose the greatest threat ever to the continuation of civilization as we now know it.

President-Elect Obama has been sounding the alarm for well over a year that herein lies our greatest threat.  At any time now, the Mujahideen can march down from the border region and overtake the government of Pakistan, along with its significant nuclear arsenal, practically ensuring a nuclear holocaust which will begin with Pakistan and India.  Sir, President-Elect Obama has repeatedly said that if we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets in Pakistan and the Pakistani government won't or can't act, then we will.  Yet, Mr. President, you Sir, chided then-Senator Obama when he made these remarks in August of 2007, saying the comments were "unsavory" and you even went so far as to call the Pakistani president to apologize for then-Senator Obama's remarks and to assure him that the United States "respects the sovereignty" of Pakistan.  Talk about appeasement, Mr. President!

Mr. President, for forsaking the wise counsel of many not to invade Iraq and for your profound and admitted unpreparedness when you stubbornly invaded anyway, Sir, it is on your hands alone that the blood of 4,200 brave soldiers now rests.  Add to that, Sir, the blood of 600,000 Iraqi civilians who have died as a result of your "liberation."  And then, Mr. President, Sir, take your rightful ownership of the brain injuries suffered by 320,000 vets and the severely debilitating burns and loss of limbs suffered by 30,000 other vets.  And if there is any room left in your guilty conscience, Sir, ponder the very real potential of a nuclear holocaust beginning with Pakistan and India, made possible by your  arrogant abandonment of our clear mission in Afghanistan in favor of your muddled and delusional mission in Iraq.

Thank you for your time Mr. President and may you eventually come to understand the unmitigated disaster which you have been for our great country.

Cordially Yours.

Following the mind-numbing devastation of Hurricane Katrina, Rev. Hagee sermonized to his San Antonio congregation thusly: “When you violate God’s will long enough, the judgment of God comes to you.  Katrina is an act of God for a society that is becoming Sodom and Gomorrah reborn.”  More than a year after Katrina, in a September 18, 2006 interview with NPR’s Terri Gross, Rev. Hagee reiterated his considered judgment that God had used Katrina to punish New Orleans because, “the city had a level of sin that was offensive to God and they were the recipients of the judgments of God for that.”

So, Rev. Hagee, my question to you, ye who knoweth the mind of God, what are the sins for which Galveston and Houston are now being punished by Hurricane Ike?

While I wouldn’t presume to know the mind of God in such matters, I do know a thing or two about the mind of the Religious Right, so let me discern Rev. Hagee’s response in advance.  Dr. James Dobson’s explanation of Hurricane Gustav is instructive in this endeavor.  Dr. Dobson’s organization, Focus on the Family, had issued a national call to prayer, asking Christians all across America to pray for a storm of “Biblical proportions” to disrupt the Democratic National Convention.  As it turned out, the sun smiled brightly upon the Democrats, but the first day of the Republican National Convention was disrupted by a hurricane.  Called upon to account for this outcome, Dr. Dobson quoted from Matthew 5:45 in a Fox News interview saying “it rains on the just and unjust” as if inclement weather is just some random act of nature.  In other words, hurricanes are punishment from God when the Religious Right says so and hurricanes are random acts of nature, when the Religious Right says so.   

Galatians 6:7 says, “God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.”

Two weeks before Senator Barack Obama was scheduled to give his historic acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention, the leading evangelical organization Focus on the Family, headed by Dr. James Dobson, posted a video on its website wherein Focus on the Family media director Stuart Shepard walked around in front of Invesco Field, imploring Christians all across America to join with Focus on the Family in praying for a “torrential rain of Biblical proportions” specifically for the purpose of disrupting Senator Obama’s speech on August 28.  The video variously described the type of rain that the leaders of this Christian organization wanted God to send on Senator Obama as, “umbrella-ain’t-gonna-help-you rain,” “flood-the-intersections rain” and “cameras-can’t-see-his-face rain.”

But, as the 38 million viewers from home saw, the sun shone so brightly upon Barack and his throng of 80 thousand at Mile High Stadium, that many were still wearing sunglasses at 8:00pm when the pre-speech festivities began.

Contrastingly, John McCain announced today that most activities scheduled for day one of the Republican National Convention, including President Bush’s keynote speech, have been cancelled due to the torrential rains and damaging winds which are expected when Gustav, the approaching Category 3 hurricane, makes landfall on the opening night of the Republican National Convention.  Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Focus on the Family eventually removed the video and tried to downplay its significance as being a joke.  Mr. Shepard said that the video was supposed to be “mildly humorous,” spokesman Tom Minnery said, “if people took it seriously, we regret it” and Dr. Dobson said this past Friday night on Hannity and Colmes that, “it was meant to be funny.”  In trying to explain away their un-Christian and non-Biblical prayer request for Senator Obama’s speech, Focus on the Family leaders took ownership of their greater sin: making a mockery of God’s sacred gift to us of prayer.  But God will not be mocked.

So is God sending a torrential rain of Biblical proportions that will disrupt the Republican Convention because of the mockery which Focus on the Family made of prayer?  Maybe.  But what if these religious leaders were not making a mockery of prayer?  What if they really were serious in essentially “laying out a fleece before the Lord” (a test for finding God’s will described in Judges 6:37), asking God for a sign to the entire nation as to who should be president, by asking him to send a torrential and disrupting Act of God during the convention of the one who should not be president?  If so, they have their answer.