On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 10:16:14 "garold" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If the voters of this nation choose a President that prefers a more socialist economy by increased legalized theft of middle class income that's one thing, but when it comes to national security and defending ourselves against those who've vowed to see us and our way of life obliterated, Kerry's the wrong man. I realize that Arafat, Castro, Jung IL, and Al Queda have publicly supported him but I just don't feel these people have the United States best interest in mind. Does a candidate with even a shred of integrity stand before one crowd of Orwellian buzz phrasing "We support the troops" sheep and tell them the opposite of what he asserted to a different crowd earlier? There's a reason why deployed troops support Bush by 3 to 1; they understand what this war is about and know that Kerry can not be trusted. Will Kerry's army of lawyers successfully get their absentee ballots nullified like Gore was able to do while shouting "EVERY VOTE (for me) SHOULD COUNT"? If Dan Rather, as a supposed unbiased journalist, is so concerned about George Bush's military history that he would attempt to use fabricated documents to bring down a sitting President then why does he not ask Kerry why he's not released a full military accounting of his records? Why was his DD-214 not accomplished until 1979, the year Carter sanctioned blanket amnesty for deserters? Why does he have three written citations for the same medal, two of which the Commanding Officer has stated to have no knowledge of? Being caught dead to rights lying about his whereabouts at times while in-country doesn't seem to bother Mr. Rather or his class either. Why does he not show his war wounds to the cameras for the three Purple Hearts he nominated himself for? Why is the medic who's publicly stated that Kerry's scratch was self inflicted ignored? Kerry, like all military members, was aware that 3 such injuries and one goes home, never to return. Four months is just long enough to shoot a wounded combatant in the back, take reenactment videos, write up a few decorations for yourself, earn the disrespect of most of those you serve with because of your field tactics, and go home to start a career in politics. John Kerry betrayed those very men he served with for his own personal gain. He betrayed his brothers in arms by orchestrating exaggerated and falsified eye witness accounts of atrocities broadcast live while before Congress. Many of his Winter Soldiers have since been discredited but that matters not, as the impression of murderous, raping marauders has been the lasting imprint of history, truth be damned. How many know or even care that he met with the North Vietnamese on at least three different occasions and earned their worthiness for which his portrait is hung in their museum. In other times and other countries this would be classified as treason. It still is in many military minds of this country's. The end net result of his self-aggrandizement was a generation of military members who were doing what they were asked by their country being ostracized and abandoned when the vast majority honorably carried out what was asked of them. Now that same man says he's the one who should be leading them. George Bush is the first President EVER to stand up to terrorists. Carter, Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton left the fight when it got too hot politically. Kerry's voting record would indicate he's not interested in funding a military capable of fulfilling the missions he may or may not be asking them to accomplish. His public statements indicate he's at a lose to understand the mindset of those who hate America, starting with many in the United Nations, let alone his wanting to advance Iran's nuclear program for them. Now he's complaining that Bush didn't do enough to prevent the weapons in Al Qaqaa to be captured. Does that mean he's advocating we did not invade soon enough, say like in 1996 when the U.N. advisors first recommended we go into that compound and seize its assets? That would have been under the Clinton Administration, a President who if ever there was one had absolutely no interest in protecting Americans abroad; and in the case of the first World Trade Center bombing, Americans domestic. Kerry's of the same mindset; that terrorism is an annoyance. If Kerry believes what he states about following United Nations dictates why did he vote against the first Gulf War? Even surrounding Arab nations knew of the threat Saddam was to not only Kuwait but to their countries as well. President at the time followed the U.N. dictate to its letter and was later criticized by Kerry and his ilk for not invading Baghdad at the time. When it comes to foreign policy Kerry's been on the wrong side of just about every issue, depending on which side he's on at the moment. He did after all admit that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and was a threat that must be dealt with on many occasions. Senator Kerry likes to say the Bush lied to this nation and to the world about Saddam's WMD capability. Did Kerry lie as well then? Is he not part of the Senate Intelligence Committee? Even for the few times he'd have shown up to classified briefings he must have gained enough knowledge to conclude Saddam's capacity for mass destruction was not total fabrication or he wouldn't have made the public comments he did. The perplexing thing now is that Kerry's saying that we should have listened instead to the Russians and others who'd gained tremendous financially agreements with Iraq, all the while under the noises of the U.N. That would be the same Russians who helped move much of the Al Qaqaa munitions to Syria. The United Nations is as collectively concerned about terrorism as they are about stopping genocide and slavery in Africa. But give them an opening to extort more U.S. taxpayer dollars through something like a Kyoto Protocol though and they're on it faster than one can say "Oil for Food". John Kerry has never supported the troops and when his supporters spew out such a lame line it's actually an insult to those of us who do serve. And placating to corrupt third world thugs and being a patsy for the country's enemies isn't my idea of leadership, nor is betraying your fellow service members. Any true leader would not attempt to mollify terrorists but rather seek the neutralization of our sworn enemies. What is it with September 10th people that they just can not fathom that? ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/TySplB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
