No. of Recommendations: 28
In the Spirit of PA, I have decided to recognize (as so many of the far-leftists on this board have already recognized) that if it is posted on the internet, it must be true.

That being the case, I have decided to bring to all of you some of the juicier pieces out there about John Kerry, which obviously expose the man for what he really is.

http://w114.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37157

When America had a clear moral vision, we were able to see that people like Benedict Arnold were traitors. Yet today, a man who was far less valiant and far more treasonous is about to be nominated by the Democrats for the presidency.

John Kerry couldn't hold a candle to Benedict Arnold in terms of service. Arnold served longer, with greater distinction, and in more dangerous environs.

Kerry has outdone Arnold in only one respect – Kerry's treason was more insidious, more immoral and more harmful to America than Arnold could muster.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Kerry has outdone Arnold in only one respect – Kerry's treason was more insidious, more immoral and more harmful to America than Arnold could muster.

If he committed treason, why didn't the Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush 1, or Bush 2 admins prosecute him for it? I personally see this as a HUGE failure by certain current Bushies like Cheney and Rummy. If they had prosecuted Kerry for treason in the 70s, we wouldn't have to worry about this traitor becoming President.

Erk
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 62
Kerry has outdone Arnold in only one respect – Kerry's treason was more insidious, more immoral and more harmful to America than Arnold could muster.

Now let's talk about who is harming America of late:

o Which sitting president discontinued efforts started in the prior administration to target bin Laden and dismantle the al Quaeda network, claiming within days of taking office that Iraq was a bigger threat?

o Which sitting president ignored the CIA briefing titled "bin Laden determined to strike in US" a month before 9/11/01 which predicted terrorists would hijack aircraft and strike on US soil?

o Which sitting president on the afternoon of 9/11/01 used the day's tragedy as an excuse to begin discussions of "retaliations" against Iraq?

o Which sitting president authorized dozens of members of the bin Laden and Saudi royal families to leave the US shortly after 9/11/01 without questioning?

o Which sitting president illegally diverted funds away from the war in Afghanistan to initiate a war in Iraq without finishing the job, leaving bin Laden as a threat?

o Which sitting president in words and actions has stopped efforts to capture or kill the man responsible for thousands of deaths on American soil? No mention of bin Laden in the 2004 RNC. And when questioned about bin Laden, says he doesn't know or care where he is. What message does this send to other terrorists?

o Which sitting president mis-calculated the cost of the Iraq war? The reception we'd get from the Iraqi people? The number of troops required? The number of casualties? Actually, mis-calculate isn't the right word; it's more like disregarded plans and recommendations from his own advisors, relying instead on guideance from God who somehow got it wrong despite being omnipotent.

o Which sitting president as angered allies and enemies alike and created more enemies willing to attack US interests?

o Which sitting president went to Iraq with intentions of securing WMDs but didn't secure the borders or even the weapons that were found there.

Let's put things in perspective. It's hard to imagine any single American in recent history that is more dangerous and capable of allowing so much harm to occur to Americans. Whether it's ignorance, incompetence, ideology, special interests, or out-right maliciousness does not matter. I don't know and don't care which it is. Bottom-line is he is a danger and must be removed from power.

Sleeps.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Actually, mis-calculate isn't the right word; it's more like disregarded plans and recommendations from his own advisors, relying instead on guideance from God who somehow got it wrong despite being omnipotent.

LOL.

<whisper>Psst. He told Buchanan something entirely different. </whisper>

SLL
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
In the Spirit of PA, I have decided to recognize (as so many of the far-leftists on this board have already recognized) that if it is posted on the internet, it must be true.

In other words, you realize you're lying but you're going to do it anyway?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"...o Which sitting president authorized dozens of members of the bin Laden and Saudi royal families to leave the US shortly after 9/11/01 without questioning?..."
---------

sleepsatnight, why do you repeat false statements?

Is it you simply repeat them without checking to see if they're true or do you for instance here dispute the man, Clarke, hardly a Bush supporter, who said they could leave after twenty were questioned by the FBI?



Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1

"...o Which sitting president authorized dozens of members of the bin Laden and Saudi royal families to leave the US shortly after 9/11/01 without questioning?..."

Is it you simply repeat them without checking to see if they're true or do you for instance here dispute the man, Clarke, hardly a Bush supporter, who said they could leave after twenty were questioned by the FBI?


Which part of my statement is not truthful? As I understand it, the following are facts:

o Dozens of members of the bin Laden and Saudi royal families left the US shortly after 9/11/01.

o Many were not questioned.

o This was authorized at the highest level of the government.

Sleeps.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
"...o Which sitting president authorized dozens of members of the bin Laden and Saudi royal families to leave the US shortly after 9/11/01 without questioning?..."
---------------------------------------------------------------

"Is it you simply repeat them without checking to see if they're true or do you for instance here dispute the man, Clarke, hardly a Bush supporter, who said they could leave after twenty were questioned by the FBI?"
____________________________________________________________________

"Which part of my statement is not truthful? As I understand it, the following are facts:
o Dozens of members of the bin Laden and Saudi royal families left the US shortly after 9/11/01.
o Many were not questioned.
o This was authorized at the highest level of the government."

Sleeps.
=================================================================

Richard Clarke authorized their departure, not Bush as you have stated, and only after the ADULTS were questioned and intel reviewed.

Do you suggest the children should have been beaten and interrogated perhaps?

Good luck.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Richard Clarke authorized their departure, not Bush as you have stated, and only after the ADULTS were questioned and intel reviewed.

Do you suggest the children should have been beaten and interrogated perhaps?


Where to begin...

1. Are you suggesting that the adults should have been beaten? I'm certainly not. That sounds like one of those *exaggerations*.

2. Do you have a link that states that *all adults* were questioned?

3. Sure Clarke may have authorized it, but so did Bush. Clarke testified that he approved these flights, stating that "it was a conscious decision with complete review at the highest levels of the State Department and the FBI and the White House." Testimony of Richard Clarke, Former Counterterrorism Chief, National Security Council, before The Senate Judiciary Committee, September 3, 2003.. Are you saying that Bush had no knowledge of this despite being reviewed at the highest levels of the White House?

Sleeps.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"Where to begin..."
------------

You already have.. quibble away....
Print the post Back To Top