Posted on 10/01/2004 4:11:11 PM PDT by Nice50BMG
5.56mm
I think some radiation exposure would explain a lot.
Sorry , I responded to an earlier statement. Try this from Jerusalem Post @ 7/30 /04 www.jpost.com/servlet/satellite?pagename=jpost/jparticle/showfull&cid=1091072363164&p=100695307987 ( also search kerry israel)
Iran isn't interested in a dirty bomb, they want the real thing.
Why are we not seeing this covered in the MSM? This is a great opportunity tp FREEP an issue!
A slim possibility.
All liberals are not alike. I used to be a pretty hard leftist, but I would not say that I was ever a self-destructive suicide-mongering freak. What turned me over to conservatism was when I myself caught some liberal lies and started wondering 'what else are they lying about'?
If any significant number of liberals are like I used to be, I have a feeling that an unprecedented number of people in this election cycle are going to take whichever color pill it is that shows reality (was it the blue one or the red one?) causing a major sea change against the Democrats.
Because they are DNC presstitutes.
Ping
. . . "HE'S GOING TO GIVE NUKES TO IRAN!?" "Kerry is going to give nukes to Iran?" "Kerry's gonna give nukes to Iran?" "He can't give nukes to Iran, he just can't." "John Forbes Kerry is giving nukes to Iran!" "Teraaaaaza! SOMEBODY!" Al ...? Bill ...?
"Americans are inclined to see the world and foreign affairs in black and white. They celebrate their own form of government and denigrate all others, making them guilty of what he calls 'ethnocentric accommodation' -- everyone ought to be like us. As a result, America has committed the 'fatal error' of 'propagating democracy' and fallen prey to 'the siren's song of promoting human rights,' falsely assuming that our values and institutions are a good fit in the Third World. And, just as Americans exaggerate their own goodness, they exaggerate their enemies' badness. The Soviet Union wasn't nearly as imperialistic as American politicians warned. Seeing the Soviet Union as the aggressor in every instance, and the U.S. as only reacting defensively, relieves an American observer from the need to see any parallel between our use of military power in distant parts of the world, and the Soviet use of military power outside the Soviet Union. . . . Third world Marxist movements were autonomous national movements -- outside Moscow's orbit."
More quotes and facts on the John F. Kerry Timeline. Email it to your friends.
They connected the dots in 1998 but Senator Kerry and MSM can't seem to connect the dots in 2004.
Here is an easy to read chart of what the media was saying pre-911 (and after): Connect the Dots...Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden
.
ping
Reference your post # 36.
You are correct.
Iran has stated publically that the minute they get their nuclear weapons operational they will attack Israel first and the United States second.
Unlike the North Koreans, the Iranian mohammadan religious leaders do not have the intelligence not to use nuclear weapons.
The North Koreans may talk and threaten but so long as we have a President like President Bush they will never launch the first strike. Why? Because they know retaliation fron a President Like Bush would be swift and sure.
With John Kerry or a President of his ilk, all bets are off. Why? Because they know that John Kerry is weak and a President of his ilk would be weak also. They know that they can launch a strike and Kerry would not retaliate.
John Kerry as President is a far greater threat to United States citizens than to our foreign enemies.
I am so happy that you have come over to the "light". Earlier in my life I was optimistic about people changing their colors when they were shown the error of their ways, but the hard-left has done their best to eliminate Right or Wrong and this leaves many liberals comfortable to fall back on what they "feel" is right, regardless of objective reality. You are lucky to have grasped objective reality, but many will not.
Liberalism is entropic, and it will carry many with it who cannot escape its decay. I'm glad you are out, but I stand by my believe that the lard-left are self-destructive (entropic) and that they ultimately can't even value their own life because at its farthest reaches, this requires them to acknowledge themselves beyond the pack (anti-socialist) and requires them to place objective value on their own life.
This is why liberals and islamofascists are so close to each other ideologically. It is the reason why the MSM intrinsically takes up the plight of the Islamic expremist killers and gives them any credence at all.
Were only there a pill that could clarify your objective reality. The Matrix may have been an interesting metaphor for the liberal thought "black hole" that swallows reality for many.
Sorry to board - this should have beem a private reply. :-)
I shudder to think that Iran is a country we know about. How many other countries or "groups" is Comrade Kerry willing to sell nukes to? No doubt there are some French palms waiting to get greased.
I am NOT a Kerry supporter. I think what he was saying is that by giving them nuclear fuel, they will have no excuse to start enriching urainium (which they say they are doing to get nuclear fuel).
IMO, this is not a smart strategy.
I did not wake up. This is a horrible nightmare.
You need to understand that this is the outlook not just of John Kerry, but of the entire foreign policy establishment and almost all of the CIA. One of the reasons for the slowness of progress in Iraq is that both bureaucracies have been fighting any real improvement since before the war. Whenever Bush tries to implement a new initiative, there are leaks from the CIA/State. Whenever Bush presses the point that there are indeed links between Iraq and al Qaeda this is contradicted by leaks from the CIA/State.
Now Holbrook, [not at]Albright and the rest are peddling the line that the NoKorean nukes came into existence under Bush's watch. True, as far as it goes: not very far. The monitoring of plutonium was a misdirection that the NoKoreans used to snooker the "geniuses" in the foreign policy establishment and the ineffectual CIA. That program was in operation from virtually the start of the "Agreed Framework." Kerry blathered on about how there were television cameras and live monitoring during that period. If only it were so. The sad fact is that we have virtually no human intelligence or worthwhile analysis inside the most dangerous regimes in the world. In order to cover up this fact, the CIA and State Department have embarked on an anonymous smear campaign against the President. In the second term he needs to use the 9/11 Commission's recommendations as a cover to dismantle Consular Operations and the CIA.
The title is wrong. Giving nuclear materials to Iran is bad enough as it is, but Kerry didn't say he would give them "nukes".
You really should ask the Admin Mod to change the title for accuracy.
I can't imagine anyone voting for a man who would say such a thing as this, that he would give nuclear materials to Iran.
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.