SEE+HEAR Virtual John Kerry Give Vietnam Vets the Finger... AGAIN

6.04.04 | Mia T

[Mia T]

SEE + HEAR Virtual John Kerry Give Vietnam Vets the Finger. . . AGAIN
(Do you REALLY want this finger on the nuclear button?)

 

 

UNFIT:
taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA

#3-sang-froid and the "nuclear" button

by Mia T, 6.03.04

 

 
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

missus clinton's REAL virtual office update
http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com
http://virtualclintonlibrary.blogspot.com
http://demmemogate.blogspot.com
http://www.hillarytalks.us
http://www.hillarytalks.org
fiendsofhillary.blogspot.com
fiendsofhillary.us
fiendsofhillary.org
fraudsofhillary.com

 

"Most powerful is he who has himself in his own power."

Seneca

 

"He that would govern others, first should be the master of himself."

Philip Massinger

"The sign of an intelligent people is their ability to control their emotions by the application of reason."

Marya Mannes

 

"A silly idea is current that good people do not know what temptation means.  This is an obvious lie.  Only those who try to resist temptation know how strong it is....  A man who gives in to temptation after five minutes simply does not know what it would have been like an hour later.  That is why bad people, in one sense, know very little about badness.  They have lived a sheltered life by always giving in." 

C.S. Lewis

Monday, May 31, 2004 10:53 p.m. EDT

Kerry 'Flips Off' Vietnam Vet

Former Congressman John Leboutillier reports on a Memorial Day confrontation between Sen. John Kerry and a fellow Vietnam veteran:

Democratic senator - and certain presidential nominee - John F. Kerry gave the middle finger to a Vietnam veteran at the Vietnam Memorial Wall on Memorial Day morning, NewsMax.com has learned.

Ted Sampley, a former Green Beret who served two full tours in Vietnam, spotted Kerry and his Secret Service detail at about 9:00 a.m. Monday morning at the Wall. Sampley walked up to Kerry, extended his hand and said, "Senator, I am Ted Sampley, the head of Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry, and I am here to escort you away from the Wall because you do not belong here."

At that point a Secret Service officer told Sampley to back away from Kerry. Sampley moved about 6 feet away and opened his jacket to reveal a HANOI JOHN T-shirt.

Kerry then began talking to a group of schoolchildren. Sampley then showed the T-shirt to the children and said, "Kerry does not belong at the Wall because he betrayed the brave soldiers who fought in Vietnam."

Just then Kerry - in front of the school children, other visitors and Secret Service agents - brazenly 'flashed the bird' at Sampley and then yelled out to everyone, "Sampley is a felon!"

Kerry was referring to an incident 12 years ago when Sampley confronted Sen. John McCain's chief aide, Mark Salter, in a Senate stairwell after McCain repeatedly offended POW families at a Senate POW hearing. Sampley, whose father-in-law at that time was MIA in Laos, followed Salter into the stairwell and, when they emerged, Salter had a bloody lip and a broken nose.

Sampley's group, Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry, has garnered huge national attention and has been featured in the New York Times, the Washington Post and on MSNBC's "Scarborough Country." Tens of thousands of Vietnam vets have registered their opposition to Kerry through Sampley's group.

Clearly Sampley has gotten under Kerry's skin once again.

 

Editor's note:

Breaking: The Real Story About John Kerry`s Vietnam Record -- Click Here!

[Mia T]

highlighting the audio/video ping

[Mia T]

11st in the series:

UNFIT:
taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA

#1-making the tough choices in a post-9/11 world

 

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)
thanx to jla for research
johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

[Mia T]

the 2nd:

 
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

 

UNFIT:
taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA

#2-understanding the job description

by Mia T, 5.17.04

"When bill clinton left office, not one young American in uniform was dying in a war anywhere in this world."

John Kerry

uspend disbelief for a minute. Pretend Kerry's dumb attempt at demagoguery is a serious pronouncement of policy.

What is Kerry's message? Is the premise true? Is the argument valid? And most important, what does this tell us about Kerry's fitness to serve?

THE MESSAGE

Kerry's message is implied, (a faintly outlined triptych of fallacy and falsehood, we shall soon see). It reduces to the following:

1. There exists an inverse relationship between the success of a commander-in-chief and the number of soldier deaths occurring under his watch.
   
2. By this measure, bill clinton was a successful commander-in-chief and George Bush is a failure.
   
3. Because John Kerry would operate under the bill clinton model, John Kerry would be a success by definition.

ANALYZING KERRY'S ANALYSIS

Simply put, Kerry's analysis suffers from--to borrow from Nancy Pelosi--a "shallowness," "an incompetence in terms of knowledge, judgment" and, yes, critical thinking.

Kerry's premise is false, and notwithstanding this, his thesis is easily disproved empirically.

FALSE PREMISE

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution

According to the U.S. Constitution, preserving, protecting and defending America is what the presidency is all about.

From this it follows that the measure of the success of a commander-in-chief is not inversely related to number of soldier deaths that result from a commander-in-chief protecting America but rather, the number of deaths -- both soldier and non-soldier -- that are caused by a commander-in-chief failing to protect America.

It is important to note that not all such deaths necessarily occur under that failed president's watch.

For example, not all deaths caused by clinton's repeated failure to act to protect America from the terrorists occurred under clinton's watch, witness the 2,899 deaths on September 11, 2001, and the ever-expanding number in the seemingly endless aftermath.

Achieving a low soldier mortality rate with a policy of artful battlefield-and-responsibility-avoidance is hardly the measure of commander-in-chief success.

Kerry's premise is, therefore, false, and exposes both Kerry's fundamental misunderstanding of the job of commander-in-chief and the lethal danger to a post-9/11 America that a Commander-in-Chief Kerry would pose.

THESIS EASILY DISPROVED EMPIRICALLY

Notwithstanding this, Kerry's thesis, itself, is belied by history. The obvious counterexamples: the presidencies of two of our most successful commanders-in-chief, Abe Lincoln, 562,130 deaths and FDR, 408,306.

Even if we apply the too-cute-by-half clintonesque Kerry semantic technicality, and limit the death count to those deaths coincident with the commander-in-chief's exit, the FDR counterexample still stands.

ASIDE: These transparent word games of Kerry and clinton derive from the same (if geographically disparate) provincial arrogance rooted in stupidity.

 

 

KERRY'S LETHAL DANGER TO A POST-9/11 AMERICA

Kerry's pronouncement, therefore, is more than simple... or even stupid... demagoguery. Kerry's pronouncement exposes Kerry's lack of historical perspective, Kerry's poor judgment, Kerry's critical-thinking deficiency, Kerry's fundamental misunderstanding of the job of commander-in-chief. It is a stark warning of the lethal danger to a post-9/11 America that a Commander-in-Chief Kerry would pose.

"At the time, '96, he [bin Laden] had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."

bill clinton

"The instant that second plane hit, I said to the person with whom I was speaking, 'Bin Laden did this.' I knew immediately. I know what this network can do."

bill clinton

"The War on Terror is less... is occasionally military but it's primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation."

John Kerry

"The Bush Administration is so entralled by the idea of preemption and American military might. This is the consequence of the policy that regards legitimacy as largely a product of force and victory as primarily a triump of arms...

We truly should go to war as the last resort."

John Kerry

Both Kerry and clinton fail to understand that:

• a terrorist war requires only one consenting player
• defining bin Laden's acts of war as "crimes'' is a dangerous, anachronistic, postmodern conceit (It doesn't depend on what the meaning of the word "war" is) and amounts to surrender
• preemptive action, and even more so, preventative action, serve a necessary, critically protective, as well as offensive function in any war on terror.

The sorry endpoint of the massive, 8-year clinton blunder was, of course, 9/11 and the exponential growth of al Qaeda.

John Kerry and the Left will, by definition, reprise the failed, lethally dangerous clinton policy of denial and surrender.

I, therefore, urge anyone planning to vote for John Kerry to rethink, to reconsider. Your children's lives, if not civilization, itself, just may depend on it.

I'm a single-issue voter, as I guess must have become apparent.

I'm not a Republican. I'm not a conservative. I'm not a very great admirer of the president in many ways, but I think that my condition is... that this is an administration that wakes up every morning wondering how to make life hard for the forces of Jihad and how to make as hard as possible an unapologetic defense of civilization against this kind of barbarism... and though the Bush administration has been rife with disappointment on this and incompetent, I nonetheless feel that they have some sense of that spirit.

I don't get that... I don't get that feeling from anyone who even sought the Democratic nomination.

I would [therefore] have to vote for the reelection of President Bush.

Christopher Hitchens
Washington Journal, 6.01.04
C-SPAN

 

 

copyright Mia T 2004

[SheLion]

...............FnKerry

[stillnoprotestsagainstmuslims]

Daaamn that is GREAT!!! How do you make that animation?? Is that just from flash??

[cyn]

Thanks for the ping, Mia. Great work. As always, I am awed at how you put these stories together & conjure up just the right illustrations to bring them to life. What an excellent C. S. Lewis quote -- and how true.

[R. Scott]

After reading and hearing Hanoi John’s “testimony” (AKA North Vietnamese propaganda release) for the Nth time, I caught something I had missed.
He stated that wires from field phones were hooked up to “human genitals”, and the power turned up”.
I used field phones numerous times. When I was a Saigon Warrior for a few months I was an NCS - operating several radios and phones w/ switchboard. I do not recall seeing or using any telephones with rheostat control on the line out. Power was either on or disconnected.
Can someone let me know what type of phone Hanoi John’s “veterans” were using that they could turn the power up?

[Mia T]

thank you. if you goto the links under the" finger" graphic, you will see a bunch of virtual characters: hillary, bill, more kerry, gore, pelosi, kennedy...

I use various 3D modeling, 2D illustration+painting, and lip-sinc software, as well as Flash.

Regarding your tag line:

The time has come to address the real root cause of suicide bombing: incitement by certain religious and political leaders.

In Love With Death
(Dershowitz Explicitly Nails Islamofascism As "A Culture of Death")
The Guardian (UK)| 6/4/04 | Alan Dershowitz

The dernier cri of seditious and corrupt Leftists everywhere, pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic renders the Left, irrespective of policy, no less dangerous to Western civilization than the terrorists they seek to aid and abet.

pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic
WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA
Mia T, 5.15.04

 
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

 

pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic
WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA

by Mia T, 5.15.04

As long as you've got a rich man on your arm, you don't need a big bag.

--Elizabeth Rickard

 

The $100 billion Iraqi Oil for Food program was by far the largest relief operation in the history of the United Nations. By extension, it's rapidly becoming the U.N.'s largest-ever scandal....

Those included rewarding friends and allies world-wide with oil allocations on very favorable terms, as well as extracting large kickbacks from oil traders and suppliers of humanitarian goods....

There can be little doubt that U.N. mismanagement contributed greatly to the negative perception of the anti-Saddam containment policy. There is also little doubt that the reward and kickback scheme--as well the possibility of exposure--was a factor as some countries weighed whether to back U.S.-led regime change in Iraq. There is even reason to suspect that some of the Saddam friends and allies who benefited may have been members of the U.N. Secretariat.

Oil for Scandal
The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page
Thursday, March 18, 2004 12:01 a.m.

eave it to the French to make pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic all the rage.

They and their moneygrubbing, Oil-for-Food defrauding cohorts abroad, and their power-hungry would-be terrorist sympathizers here, are all sporting "THE LOOK."

(How many of those oh so trendy Kerry-clinton-Kennedy hate-America, blame-America-first sound bites will Al-Jazeera broadcast today?)

The trusty triad's half-truths, exaggerations and outright lies, confounded by fog of war, vagaries of peace and uncharted territory of asymmetric netherworlds, remind us that things are not always what they first seem. The UN Oil-for-Food scandal, for example, has shown us it was not "going to war with Iraq" that was "all about oil," but rather, "not going to war with Iraq." The Left, we now see, had that one, (as they have most things), exactly backward.

The dernier cri of seditious and corrupt Leftists everywhere, pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic renders the Left, irrespective of policy, no less dangerous to Western civilization than the terrorists they seek to aid and abet.

also:
sanitizing evil
Kerry Cabal Censors Nick Berg Decapitation

[Mia T]

ooops: shld read "1st."

[prisoner6]

Thanks! ...and noting for later...

prisoner6

[Mia T]

thx.

The insightful C. S. Lewis observation helps explain how the clintons and kerry, for example, became so shameless, arrogant and shallow.

In my view, the behavior described is often part of a constellation of behaviors/symptoms that together form the psychopathic personality....

[Mia T]

you're welcome. :)

[Mia T]

audio/video underscoring ping

[Wolverine]

Bump for great work!

[bmwcyle]

Waking up to Mia T Bump

[stillnoprotestsagainstmuslims]

That is awesome..Yeah my tagline, to me the whole war on terror can be explained in that one line alone; no protests against terrorism. Instead of getting on terrorists ass, the left decided to embolden them with their "record breaking" protests here and in Europe last year, and the constant hounding and screaming over Bush. If you`ll remember last year (Feb 2003) there were rumors that Saddam might consider stepping down or going into exile, then the Euroweenies held the mass 'anti-war' protest after which Saddam told the UN to shove it and denied he was stepping down. It never occurs to them that part of the reason (if not the entire reason) we are at war now is directly because of them constantly emboldening a tyrant not to mention terrorism of which they are still doing to this day everyday. Imagine after 911 if they had mass protests asking Saddam to step down, mass protests against terror, if they put tremendous pressure on terrorism, on Saddam, if the liberals here and the Euroweenies in toilet world put out the message of 'enough is enough', 36 years of global terror ENOUGH! 12 years of breaking UN resolutions, 30 years of torture and genocide ENOUGH! It would be a comepletely different story from today, but nooooooo....We must have mass demonstrations of support for the terrorist, mass demonstrations of support for the psychotic tyrant! America is after oil! This is American imperialism! Aru Gharib! America is evil! (To liberals, terrorist humiliation in a prison is far worse than 36 years of global terror far worse than 30 years of torture, oppression and genocide) I find it very ironic that very same liberals who are screaming now about our soldiers being killed are the very same liberals who emboldened the killers to stand up and pull the trigger.

[Boazo]

[massadvj]

Your #3 sang-froid is more powerful than anything I have seen from the Bush campaign, which so far has been woefully incompetent in revealing the true Kerry to the voters. Excellent work.

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.


JOHN KERRY = Enemy of Vietnam Vets

http://www.TheAlamoFILM.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1320


.