This article has been posted to DoctorZin’s New News Blog!
Posted on 08/13/2004 7:04:03 AM PDT by truthandlife
John Kerry told Democrats gathered in Boston two weeks ago that he defended his country as a young soldier in Vietnam and he would defend it again as president.
But as Michael Dukakis' Lieutenant Governor, Kerry authored an executive order that said the state of Massachussetts would refuse to take part in any civil defense efforts in response to a nuclear attack on America.
The presidential candidate was an ardent proponent of the nuclear freeze at the time, and viewed Cold War civil defense preparations as an attempt to delude the American people into thinking a nuclear exchange was survivable.
Lt. Gov. Kerry's executive order on behalf of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts read in part:
"Whereas the existing and potential strength of nuclear weapons is such that nuclear war can neither be won nor survived, it can only be prevented; and Whereas the only effective defense against the horrors of nuclear weapons lies in their elimination and in the prevention of nuclear war or attacks, [the Commonwealth of Massachusetts] shall seek to ensure the safety of its citizens by pursuit of policies reflecting a serious commitment to prevention of nuclear war."
"Such policies," the Kerry directive continued, "shall include education of citizens concerning the real nature of nuclear war and efforts to influence national policy towards negotiation of an end to the nuclear-arms race."
The Kerry order stated emphatically, however: "No funds shall be expended by the Commonwealth for crisis relocation planning for nuclear war."
Monica Conyngham, Lt. Gov. Kerry's spokeswoman at the time, defended the controversial document, telling reporters, ''We believe that (evacuation) plans are absolutely futile and that there are no safehavens from nuclear war.''
Gov. Dukakis signed Kerry's "no nuclear defense" executive order into law on June 28, 1984.
PLENTY TRUE.
AND, an IMPORTANT point of CHARACTER. imho.
This remarkable Kerry policy scared the Soviet Union into dissolving, provided the impetus for knocking down the Berlin Wall and ruined the Soviet economy in its costly efforts to match Kerry's imaginative approach. Much good has come out of the People's Republic of Massachusetts.
If he behaved that way the COTJCS and co would give him the 45 caliber impeachment and then respond.
If a sitting US President refused to take action in response to a nuclear attack ... there would still be a response ... starting with the elimination of that president ... and I;m not talking by impeachment
Misleading headline, but nontheles not the statements of a moderate or even a left of center type.
But Kerry would just go to the UN.
Kerry is a dangerous choice. All this news about how he has voted in the past. All this light shed on how he would run to the UN.
IT ONLY GIVES OUR ENEMIE'S CONFIDENCE!
They see another KLINTOON who would respond with "lawyers".
And they see that if they attack...there will be no reprecussions.
The 9/11 investigations have quotes from capture terrorist leaders who say that the general thought was...America will just send lawyers.
This latest news on Kerry's true views.....puts that thought back in their heads. If he wins.....there will be attacks. One of the reasons they have held off on the smaller attacks....is because they know Bush will go after them. AND that Bush has set it up where these dudes get busted if they blink.
So what is this country called "Japan"???
A lot of it was, and even continues to be, overblown hysteria. Would use of nukes be ugly? Of course it would. Would all out war be even uglier? Certainly, in the US, we'd expect from 20 to 100 million dead. Would it be the end of the world? NO! Would some people survive? YES! Would reconstruction occur? YES! What the libs always have hated most about nuclear war, is that the coastal cities would be where the lion's share of the dead would be. It is that thought, the idea of tens of Dresdens (a more appropriate analogy than the far lesser attacks of Hiroshima or Nagasaki), the idea of years, perhaps decades, of war of mass destruction, and the final end of liberalism they would bring, that is the root cause of the liberals reactive abject fear of the next great war. So, therefore, we must, according to them, kick the can down the road as long as possible.
When I read your article, I immediately recognized Kerry's sick mindset. The most disturbing thing, to me, about the attitude of non preparation for a very real (even today!) great war contingency was that it shamefully and politically put the unobtaiable utopian ideal of building this mythical "World Beyond War" as more important than protection of the Commonwealth, which government is sworn to do. So, not only was it a horrendous ethical and moral failing, it was an abject failing of duty and honor. If this man gets elected, we shall be in deep trouble.
Let's play "Spot The Newsmax Headline"!
Okay, so drop the 'willow' suffix if u like :-)
Americans in charge of protecting the civilian population know enough tell the people to relocate when hurricanes threaten. (In this current case, 1.9 M citizens are warned to move out; Category 4 Charley heads to Florida.)
I think Kerry is off his rocker.
grizzfan, thanks for alerting me to this.
bttt
EFnK is a complete psychopath.,,a traitor, and an ignorant clown who has no business cleaning toilets much less inhabiting the Oval Office.
I hope there are such patriots at that time.
Such a time will come, it seems.
I pray not this soon!
Actually, I think recycling used toilet paper would be too good a job for him.
All muslims would be dead after an A-bomb is every Mosque.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.