So we've covered Kerry's past when he was a Naval Officer when he decieved the Navy. We've covered how the hero used an obscure rule, not to mention at least one questionable purple heart. [There are statements from crewmates that are claiming at least two purple hearts were from self-inflicted wounds and we are trying to corroborate these charges.] We've covered the hero who complained so much that he was being sent to a more dangerous area, that he was transferred in order to remain patrolling the coastal water ways while he was hunting purple hearts.
We've covered Kerry the Activist who deceived his anti-war peers into believing that he really cared, either way, about US involvement in Vietnam. We exposed him over his medal tossing incident as well as shown him to exploit the POW issue in an attempt to pressure the Nixon Administration to abdicate and leave [even more] men behind. He lied when he stated that Vietnam agreed to release all prisoners thereby removing the final obstacle to the US agreeing to withdraw. Ironic that he later chaired the Select Committee investigating the very issue he helped create and offered the explanation that Nixon felt pressured to get out of Vietnam.
We've covered Kerry the expert on Vietnam Veteran who stigmatized an entire generation with his charges of day-to-day atrocities that were allegedly committed by Vietnam Veteran's, including Kerry during his extensive tour, the bulk of which turned out to be outright fabrications by people who were not only never in Vietnam, but never in the military!
We've extensively covered Kerry the Senator who chaired the Select Committee on an issue that Kerry himself had a direct hand in creating. He was part of the pressure that Richard Nixon felt in coming to the decision to withdraw American troops from Vietnam before absolutely ascertaining that we were getting all our men home. We've exposed his greed in allowing the family run company, Colliers International, into accepting a contract worth $905 million dollars to develop a deep sea port in Vietnam while he was wrapping up the final report of said committee. We barely touched upon the other contract, also worth hundreds of millions of dollars, that Vietnam awarded to Collier's to represent Vietnam in Commercial Real Estate deals AND to represent Vietnam in bid openings for the repair of Vietnam's infrastructure. We are awaitng the results of a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request before detailing those contracts. We exposed Kerry's direct involvement in the shredding of live sighting reports that were turned over to the Select Committee where Kerry claimed he broke no law because what he shred were copies, nevermind the moral obligation he had to make these live sighting reports known to the American public; and we've exposed him as being behind of the shredding of thousands of live-sighting related documents by Maj. Gen. Needham, [then] Commander of the Joint Task Force-Full Accounting. We exposed Kerry's staff director, Frances Zwenig, for using her position with the Select Committee to head a Country Division of a for profit organization promoting US Business with Vietnam. Could the real reason for the Select Committee be that Kerry & Company wanted to remove the last obstacle to restoring diplomatic (and thereby business) relations with Vietnam? History will undoubtedly state so.
We've given you his voting record, as best as we could, and we've exposed him for being soft on national security in that voting record. The times that we live in mandates that we have a decisive, strong and no-nonsence Commander-In-Chief. After taking a good hard look at Candidate Kerry, does he fit that bill? If you are honest with yourself, you know the answer to that as well as I do. If Kerry is elected, I honestly believe that we will be attacked again before the month is out after his swearing in! ! ! (That's within 11 days after he is sworn in for those who are numerically challenged.) This is not a time to be voting against someone simply to vote against someone. It is your responsibility to cast an educated vote.
So now let's look at Today's Kerry. When Bill Clinton ran for President, he was being criticized for avoiding service in Vietnam and once he got a deferral, organizing demonstrations on foreign soil (England) while his country was at war (Vietnam.) John Kerry came to the defense of Clinton: "We do not need to divide America over who served and how. I have always personally believed that many served in many different ways." But now that he is running, it's OK to divide America over who served and how, right John?
More recently, while trying to distinguish himself as a Dean alternative during the Democratic Primaries, and President Bush was preparing the nation for the US military engagement of Iraq without the sanction from the UN, Kerry made several statements:
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
"Iraq may not be the war on terror itself, but it is critical to the outcome of the war on terror and therefore any advance in Iraq is an advance forward in that..."
In 1971, American resolve toward the Communist takeover of Vietnam was sapped and drained by anti-war protests led by people like Jane Fonda and John Kerry. In fact, General Vo Nguyen Giap, Communist Vietnam's leading military expert, wrote that if not for American disunity created by protesters like John Kerry and Jane Fonda, Hanoi would have ultimately fallen and surrendered. Like 1971, the media is creating the platform on which John Kerry is presenting himself as the alternative. In '71, that platform propelled him into office. He's hoping that lightning will strike twice.
This is not 1971 though and we are not engaged against a specific sovereignty, nor is this a part of the bigger cold war. We are fighting faceless cowards, who use friendly states for safe passage, medical relief and in hopes of obtaining weaponry to use against American towns, cities, infrastructure. We pay taxes and therefore it is open season on America.
Ronald Reagan came into office and immediately went on a campaign to re-educate America. Every president since Truman had issued directives mandating our being able to outfight the Soviet Union. Ronald Reagan was determined that we not outfight them, he went further and made it a moral issue. Enlisting Margaret Thatcher and the Pope, Reagan made the case that morally, the Soviet Union had no right to exist, much less the western world living under the assumption that we had to find a way of co-existing. It was Reagan's vision, his selling that vision to the American public and his build-up of our military that led to the demise of the Evil Empire. John Kerry voted against SDI (Star-Wars) and every program that Reagan sent to the Hill. Is this what he means by Help Is On The Way? Where was this help when his party had both the House and Senate several short years ago?
Kerry Voted against last year's (2003-04) Supplemental Defense Funding. Since A Stronger America is one of Kerry's mantras on which he is running, the '03-04 Supplemental Defense funding included an additional $1.3 billion dollars for Veteran Healthcare. Help Is On The Way?
True to form, Kerry voted against the fiscal 2004 supplemental package of $86.5 billion for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. (This was what he was referring to when he was speaking to a veterans group in Virginia when he said first he voted for the $87 billion before voting against it.--More on that in a few.) The Senate version of this bill included an additional $1.3 billion for veterans' medical care. Help Is On The Way?
Kerry skipped a vote for funding the Veteran's Administration with $28.6 billion for FY 2004-05, which included $1 billion to expedite the processing of benefit claims. This was part of the Omnibus Appropriations, an increase of $2.9 billion over FY 03-04. Help Is On The Way?
How do you fault the guy sitting at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue for not properly sending the tools needed by the troops when you are the one that consistently votes against funding for those tools? How do you fault the guy sitting at 1600 for not taking "good enough" medical care of our veteran's when you are the guy that either A) Votes against the funding or B) Are too busy on the campaign trail that you have to skip doing your job. You know that Help thing? Memo to JFK: Bob Dole resigned his Senate Seat so he could concentrate on his campaign when he ran for president.
One thing that royally irks me to no end is this I-voted-for-the-87-billion-before-voting-against-it thing. Does anyone else see anything wrong with this? I see it as arrogance. I see it as we don't count, that we are so unsophisticated that we could not even spot it. How do you have the nerve to get up there and say that you don't count enough, I do not hold you in enough esteem to try to explain why I did not vote for the monies necessary to provide our troops with the tools they need to bring this engagement to an expeditious end? I mean, he thinks that since he voted for it at first that the on-the-record-nay-vote won't be noticed by any of us. Maybe that's because he has three different homes, each of which costs more than most of us will ever make in two lifetimes. I would have more respect for him if he told us either vote for me or I will make sure that catsup disappears from American grocers! ! !
During the Democratic Convention, Kerry endorsed "one of the oldest Commandments: 'Honor thy father and thy mother.' " He did this to explain why he "will not cut" social security benefits. I thought that Moses brought the Commandments down from the mount at the same time. Did he go back up for more? Did Kerry allow the Social Security pot to be raided, i.e. to let Congress use Social Security money for other programs? If he is not going to cut social security so as not to violate one of the oldest commandments, does that mean the retirement age won't change?
Kerry stated that he will "never wait for a green light from abroad when our safety is at stake," but denounced the "Bush doctrine of unilateral pre-emption." What's the message here? Does that mean a Kerry Administration will wait or not? When does it make sense to take up arms to protect America? After another town or city is attacked? Haven't we been attacked enough so that it isn't pre-emption when we respond?
If "A nuclear armed Iran is un-acceptable," what does Kerry propse we do? Iran's regime has made it clear that they will not enter into discussions on their attaining nuclear weapons. Would a Kerry Administration ask the UN to issue 17 resolutions before engaging Iran or would we act with pre-emption or unilaterally?
Let's discuss unilateral for a moment. Kerry has purportedly built a platform over unifying the world rather than acting unilaterally and breaching former relationships. Colin Powell was sent to the UN more than 5 times between September 2001 and March 2003. Bush worked the phones, had heads of state to the White House, etc., trying to get the UN on board with our engaging Iraq, all while the world believed that Weapons of Mass Destruction were being manufactured inside Iraq. KERRY believed it when he gave the president the authority under the War Powers Act. So how is Bush acting unilaterally? 'Splain that to me Lucy.
What about Taiwan? Chen Shui-bian, Taiwan's President stated that Taiwan "has reached an internal concensus that insist on Taiwan being soveriegn." China's military chief stated that Taiwan will be re-united with the Chinese mainland by 2020, the first time a deadline has been set. China has recently simulated an invasion on an island that resembles Taiwan. If a UN vote was vetoed or failed to act to protect Taiwan, how would Kerry react if China invaded Taiwan on your watch? Unilaterally? Pre-emptively? None of this has been answered.
Kerry claimed the Clinton years were "glorious." He stated that this is because we weren't at war and "young Americans were not deployed." So who were those Americans killed in Mogadishu, Somalia? What about Bosnia Hertzagavonia? What about the World Trade Center bombing? What about the Embassy in Rhodesia? How about those American's killed at Khobar Towers, the USS Cole and the Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania? What about Haiti? Were no young American's deployed there? Were only old American's killed? Does this tie-in to social security somehow? Glorious is not a word I would use to define the Clinton years. As to American's being deployed, I thought American's, young and old, have been deployed around the world since the end of World War II. Silly me.
Kerry claims that Bush misled the world and that no American will die for oil on his watch and yet Kerry acknowledges that the price of gas is at an all time high so how is war for oil is going? Really?!
A dozen years and 17 Resolutions later, after the 18th Resolution was passed, the United States invaded Iraq for the second time. Kerry authorized the president to do so. Kerry believed that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. So do I. I believe that they have them well hidden, just the same way Saddam was hiding. I believe that anyone who would write checks to the families of suicide bombers and who hates America the way that Saddam did, they have the propensity of giving terrorists either the means to get WMDs or give them the weaponry outright. Since I survived the attack on the World Trade Center, and was there for months afterwards, I believe I have a better view of what these cowards did to us and we should take every measure available to ensure that no other American town, rural area or city should ever have to deal with that again. I do not believe we can afford you, John Kerry. Report to duty elsewhere.
And Now A Word From. . . Me.
The people that are screaming about war-for-oil have forgotten that over the years the United States has sent many of our fine young men and women to fight for freedom well beyond our borders and the only land we have ever asked for is enough land to bury those unforunates who fell in battle. This war, like other US military engagements before it, is not the United States being imperial. It is about protecting freedom. It is about preserving, protecting and defending. You remember that, don't you John? You swore to it as a young Naval Officer and again each time you were re-elected to office.
11 September 2001 was brought to us by apathy. By going into conflict with an "exit strategy." We were so traumatized by the media's presentation of the Vietnam War that we looked at a Grenada or the military arrest of Manny Noriega as proof that the American Military Machine was back! We became addicted to the thought of not engaging anyone militarily unless we could ensure that we would suffer no losses. It is insane to think that we could come up with a strategy where we suffer no loss. War is the business of atrition. He who bests the other army gets to safeguard his own. In competition 101 you learn very quickly that if you go into competition with a view that you could lose, then you already have.
It is not that the United States was not attacked between Reagan and George W., we have been attacked again and again. The Marine Corps barracks in Beirut; The American Embassy in Rhodesia; Mogadishu, Somalia; The first World Trade Center bombing; the military residential Khobar Towers; the in tandem attacks on US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; the USS Cole. All of these attacks --and then some-- let's not forget the kidnapping and subsequent murder of Col. Richard Higgins--went unanswered.
Take a long, hard look at this, a graphic memorial that I did to the attack of 11 September 2001. An Act of War was committed against the people of the United States on 11 September by thugs who have the ability to travel freely in the middle east, without fear of consequence. Why? Because American resolve is notorious for waining. We want the war on terror to start and end in a two hour period with 8 cmmercial interruptions and better if we can view it on HBO or Showtime. We extend hero status to communists like Michael Moore who makes money off of the tragedy and takes "artistic license" with the facts to manipulate us into appeasement. We became American's on 11 September 2001. Not hyphenated Americans. Americans. Here it is less than three years later and United We Stand is a joke. We are back to being hyphenated Americans again. What happened to the Americans that sang God Bless America on the steps of the Capitol in September 2001? There is one thing that I know about John Kerry. He will not be able to fix our problems. What he will do is make you afraid of them and blame anyone but him for them, but he will not be able to fix them. We need strong leadership. We need decisive leadership. Lyndon Johnson tried to govern America by polls. It did not work then and it won't work now.
One of the things that made Ronald Reagan the Great Communicator is that there was never any doubt that he said what he meant and meant what he said. When George Bush addressed the joint session of Congress and stated that, "You are either with us or against us," I had no doubt that he says what he means and means what he says and if there is one thing I know, it will never, ever depend upon what the definition of is is.
After eight years of sexcapades, of denigrating the office that is the very symbol of American power, after eight years of repeated attacks against the United States; most of which resulted in our pulling out like we did after Mogadishu, Somalia, and the Yemin port after the Cole; after six to seven years of the President of the United States being sued, deposed and dragged into court for the world to see and laugh at; we have a president who, despite being in a position that no other American President has ever had to deal with before, has taken decisive action to rid the world of a cancer that prior Administrations have determined that we just have to co-exist with. Like another before him, he is leading us, albiet kicking and screaming, to that place, that moral place, that says they are morally wrong and we do not have to co-exist. I pray every night that he is as successful in this endeavor as the one other president was in that endeavor.
We were attacked. We are responding to that attack. I am not willing to wait for an attack to come from a specific geography. We all know where they are. We have a president with the stones to go and get them. Why go back 12 years? Why go back to being hyphenated Americans? Help really is on the way. It ain't cloaked in John Kerry, it's already sitting at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Open your eyes before it happens again. Unlike California, there's no recall.
Return To Are You Serious?
More on Kerry
Return to the POW/MIA Forum
Coming Soon: Links to other Kerry-enlightened Web Sights