Hey, I wonder if he is going to run over to Cambridge to see Khatami?
Posted on 09/10/2006 10:17:54 AM PDT by bitt
Sen. John F. Kerry yesterday blasted the Bush administration for war and homeland security policies that he said leave Americans more vulnerable to attack.
Kerry’s remarks came in a Faneuil Hall speech on the eve of tomorrow’s five-year anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.
In his fourth speech this year at the venue, Kerry accused the administration of using the tragedy that killed about 3,000 Americans to justify the war in Iraq.
“It is immoral to treat 9/11 as a political pawn (to) excuse the invasion of Iraq,” Kerry said. “They were attacked and killed not by Saddam Hussein but by Osama bin Laden.”
Kerry, who is likely prepping for another presidential run, urged Democrats to “redeploy from Iraq, recommit to Afghanistan, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, reinforce our homeland defense and restore America’s moral leadership in the world.” Kerry also laid out the strategy in a Boston Herald Op-Ed column yesterday.
He called the London terror plot to blow up trans-Atlantic airplanes - thwarted last month - an example of the need to bolster the focus on Afghanistan.
“The Bush-Cheney administration (has) cut and run even as we learn (the plan’s mastermind) was an al-Qaeda leader operating from Afghanistan,” Kerry said. “That’s right - the same killers who attacked us on 9/11 are still plotting attacks against America, and they’re still holed up in Afghanistan.”
He also accused Republicans of playing politics with Homeland Security funding by decreasing funds for “states that need it most - which happens to be ‘blue’ states,” while increasing it in “the ‘red’ states that need it least.”
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bostonherald.com ...
Dear Lord, thank You for whatever hand You had in keeping this, ahem, person from being elected president. Amen....
Kerry who?
This a&*hole is the reason I favor manditory abortion for democrats lest they breed and populate the earth with sub human offspring.
Hey, I wonder if he is going to run over to Cambridge to see Khatami?
John who?
Not as bad as lying about Nam to become Prez! What a maroon!
Pray for W and Our Troops
Well, not everyone had the opportunity to bring a camera to 'nam and pose Senator.
"We must recognize that there is no indication that Saddam Hussein has any intention of relenting. So we have an obligation of enormous consequence, an obligation to guarantee that Saddam Hussein cannot ignore the United Nations. He cannot be permitted to go unobserved and unimpeded toward his horrific objective of amassing a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. This is not a matter about which there should be any debate whatsoever in the Security Council, or, certainly, in this Nation. If he remains obdurate, I believe that the United Nations must take, and should authorize immediately, whatever steps are necessary to force him to relent--and that the United States should support and participate in those steps.
We must not presume that these conclusions automatically will be accepted by every one of our allies, some of which have different interests both in the region and elsewhere, or will be of the same degree of concern to them that they are to the U.S. But it is my belief that we have the ability to persuade them of how serious this is and that the U.N. must not be diverted or bullied."
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
October 9, 2002 John Kerry speech on the Floor of the Senate, from the Congressional Record, p. S10170-S10175
With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question: Why? Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up? Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community? Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster? Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke? Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits? Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously? Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified? Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?
Does he do all of these things because he wants to live by international standards of behavior? Because he respects international law? Because he is a nice guy underneath it all and the world should trust him?
It would be naive to the point of grave danger not to believe that, left to his own devices, Saddam Hussein will provoke, misjudge, or stumble into a future, more dangerous confrontation with the civilized world. He has as much as promised it. He has already created a stunning track record of miscalculation. He miscalculated an 8-year war with Iran. He miscalculated the invasion of Kuwait. He miscalculated America's responses to it. He miscalculated the result of setting oil rigs on fire. He miscalculated the impact of sending Scuds into Israel. He miscalculated his own military might. He miscalculated the Arab world's response to his plight. He miscalculated in attempting an assassination of a former President of the United States. And he is miscalculating now America's judgments about his miscalculations.
All those miscalculations are compounded by the rest of history. A brutal, oppressive dictator, guilty of personally murdering and condoning murder and torture, grotesque violence against women, execution of political opponents, a war criminal who used chemical weapons against another nation and, of course, as we know, against his own people, the Kurds. He has diverted funds from the Oil-for-Food program, intended by the international community to go to his own people. He has supported and harbored terrorist groups, particularly radical Palestinian groups such as Abu Nidal, and he has given money to families of suicide murderers in Israel.
Kerry is really one to talk. The DemonRats are the ones screaming that we are no safer since 9/11 despite 11+ major terrorist strikes being stopped before they could be executed. They're the ones screaming that the war on terrorism is a big mistake. They're the ones on the blitz against Bush's foreign policy in the week before the 5-year anniversary to Sept. 11, 2001. Tell me again who is using it as a political pawn?
and we need keywords, people....
This from the butt boy who mentions Vietnam in every other sentence. What a complete stoodge.
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
i know, i know. it's just that the truth is always opposite of what he says. i can't believe anyone listens to him at all, the arrogant strutter with the pompadour. he disdains this republic; if he had the choice, he would be king.
Bet every one of them still have their Yaaawn/Edwards stickers on their cars. Great pic!
Pray for W and Our Troops
I just don't understand why Democrats believe that we if get Osama Bin Laden that the war on terror will be over?
haha, also from the Herald,
"Gregg socks Kerry
Sen. John Kerry and New Hampshire nemesis Sen. Judd Gregg got into a war of words over the Iraq war last week that managed to drag the Red Sox into the fray.
Slapping the junior senator for his “Monday morning quarterbacking” of the president’s handling of the war, Judd said Kerry would no doubt have run things very differently over the years if he were in charge on Yawkey Way.
“He would have said that he wouldn’t have put Bill Buckner at first, he wouldn’t have pitched to Bucky Dent, he wouldn’t have sent to Carlton Fisk his contract, and he definitely wouldn’t have traded Babe Ruth.”
Kerry aide de camp David Wade fired back that “New Hampshire’s own Carlton Fisk must’ve felt his blood pressure soar hearing Sen. Gregg mangle Red Sox lore on the floor of the Senate.”
What Gregg apparently meant to say was that, unlike the Red Sox front office - Kerry wouldn’t have sent the catcher his contract late, which allowed Fisk to become a free agent.
“Bottom line,” said Wade, “when it comes to doing the job as secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld is Bill Buckner, Mike Torrez and Harry Frazee all rolled into one.”
So does that put Kerry in the Fellowship of the Miserable?
http://thetrack.bostonherald.com/moreTrack/view.bg?articleid=156766&format=&page=2
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.