TIME TO FOLLOW KERRY'S LEAD?

Private Email | OCTOBER 28, 2004 | CHRISTOPHER ADAMO

[CHARLITE]

Time to Follow Kerry’s Lead? By: Christopher G. Adamo

At one time, John Kerry wanted to make Vietnam the centerpiece of his campaign, based on his belief that the contrast between his four months of combat and George Bush’s guard service would stand the Massachusetts liberal in good stead with an America immersed in the war on terror.

Unfortunately for Kerry, groups such as the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth followed suit, thus bringing forth his overall war record for examination. And what was learned wasn’t pretty. Kerry's “battle wounds” amounted to little more than the degree of “boo-boo” which might earn a typical five year old an ice cream cone or maybe cupcake (though conscientious parents would probably consider three such incidents in four months to be evidence of a suspicious pattern).

Nevertheless, Kerry demanded much greater recognition of his “sacrifice,” insisting that he eventually be awarded three Purple Hearts. No wonder he found it so easy to discard those medals some months later during an anti-war protest.

This was an account of Kerry’s Vietnam service that he did not want the nation to see. Yet the Swift Vets persevered, and the truth was told. Immediately, Kerry’s poll numbers began to plummet (Truth seems to have that effect on him). So the Senator did the only thing he could. He changed the subject.

Now he believes he has stumbled on a winning strategy for the last days of the campaign… talk about the war on terror. If the Bush camp is smart, they will seize this opportunity and follow suit with a vengeance.

Kerry’s latest ploy is of course to focus attention on the bogus story of 380 tons of missing explosives in Iraq, which he seeks to convince America, were looted under the watch of US forces. In reality, it was a combination of bungling UN inspectors, coupled with the endless delays in the commencement of US operations to remove Saddam (and Kerry vehemently and steadfastly supported those delays), that allowed time for removal of the weaponry by Russian special forces and Saddam loyalists.

Yet right up to this week, what has Kerry advocated but more deferrals to the UN, as well as his hindsight appraisal that we should have waited even longer to deal with Hussein, thus allowing time for even more munitions to be spirited away to places like Syria.

So, by all means, let’s talk about the war on terror. Let’s talk about the fact that Kerry voted to send US troops into battle, but then voted against giving them proper funding once deployed.

Let’s talk about the fact that, in an identical manner to his treasonous 1971 Senate testimony, Kerry is once again attempting to boost his own political fortunes by making outlandish and unsupportable claims of malfeasance and incompetence on the part of the US military.

Let’s talk about the fact that Kerry’s constant harping on the “failures” and “bungling” of US efforts in Iraq only serves to boost the morale of the Islamist insurgents, ultimately at the expense of the lives of American soldiers. When it comes to giving aid and comfort to America’s mortal enemies, Kerry has been absolutely consistent throughout the entirety of his public life.

Let’s talk about the effect on the resolve, and thus the belligerence of Islamic militants in Iraq and around the world if America, by electing Kerry, signals its willingness to retreat in the face of increased violence and opposition.

Let’s talk about how the leaders of Islamist terrorist organizations, with an end game in mind of seeing the total destruction of the United States, are doing and saying whatever they can to help secure a Kerry victory.

Let’s talk about the fact that, if elected, Kerry will likely promote Jamie Gorelick to high office within the US Justice Department. This despite the fact that Gorelick is the very person who crippled the ability of America’s intelligence agencies to share and compile information on terrorist plots, thus setting the stage for the surprise attacks of 9-11.

Let’s talk about the other Clinton “insiders,” who are likely to become major department heads under a “President Kerry.” It was on their watch that Osama Bin Laden was offered to America on several occasions. But according to their thinking, the entire issue was one of “law enforcement,” and not of national security. So Bin Laden walked, and was thus allowed to continue with his dastardly plan. Kerry would return America to that blindfolded and ineffectual approach to dealing with international terrorism.

On the heels of the fraudulent Al Qaqaa controversy, the Bush team should once again move the discussion of militant Islamism to the forefront. They should point to their successes during the past three years since 9-11, chief among which being that no follow-up attack of that magnitude has occurred within the borders of this nation since then.

And they should remind Americans that in Kerry’s world, malignant forces such as the Hussein regime would still be up and running, with the only response being an endless excretion of more toothless resolutions from the United Nations. Unaccounted explosives would not be measured in the hundreds of tons, but in the thousands or ten thousands of tons. And the United States would be utterly powerless to prevent their deployment.

Finally they should drive home the fact that had John Kerry had his way, America’s posture to this day would be inept and defensive, waiting nervously to respond to the next bloodbath on American soil.

So, by all means Senator Kerry, let’s talk about national security and the war on terror.

Comment: cadamo@wyoming.com

[Rocko]

Bumpitttt.