The Reactionary

So what is Kerry's real plan to win the war against terror. Mostly it's to say, "I have a plan". Okay, let's look at the Kerry plan from his own web site.

1) "Launch And Lead A New Era Of Alliances
The threat of terrorism demands alliances on a global scale - to utilize every available resource to get the terrorists before they can strike at us. As resident, John Kerry will lead a coalition of the able - because no force on earth is more able than the United States and its allies."

LOL. It sounds so good. But what does it mean? The US has already formed an alliance against terrorism. We have killed over 3000 Al Quida in 107 different countries. What does Kerry mean when he says "Use every available resource". We could grow our intelligence, military and police services by a factor of 10. Of course we would go broke, but then we would be using every available resource. "Use every available resource is" political propaganda and it tell you absolutely nothing about what Kerry will do. What does Kerry mean by a "coalition of the able"? How are the "bribed and coerced" going to suddenly turn into the "able" France and Europe are trying to set themselves up as competitiors for the US in power and influence. Where does Kerry get the idiotic idea that they are suddenly going to want to be led. Is China going to want to be led by Kerry? The man is living in a fantasy land of political rhetoric.

2) "Modernize The World's Most Powerful Military To Meet New Threats
John Kerry and John Edwards have a plan to transform the world's most powerful military to better address the modern threats of terrorism and proliferation, while ensuring that we have enough properly trained and equipped troops to meet our enduring strategic and regional missions."

What does Kerry mean by "Modernize" in this section of Kerry's plan we are simply told that "he has a plan". It's kind of a "I have a plan to have a plan to have a plan."

3) "Deploy All That Is In America's Arsenal
The war on terror cannot be won by military might alone. As president, John Kerry will deploy all the forces in America's arsenal - our diplomacy, our intelligence system, our economic power, and the appeal of our values and ideas - to make America more secure and prevent a new generation of terrorists from emerging."

So what is Kerry saying here. We are already doing all of the things that are mentioned. There are no specifics about what he would do differnetly. Does he think that he can get people like France, Russia, and China to join us after they have been bought off by Saddam Hussein? Does he think that he can negotiate with Islamofacists? And if he is so gung ho about intelligence why did he vote to cut their spending so many times? When Kerry talks about the "appeal of our values and ideas" does he really think that our values and ideas are going to appeal to Al Quida. It is our values and ideas that they specifically hate.

4) "Free America From Its Dangerous Dependence On Mideast Oil
To secure our full independence and freedom, we must free America from its dangerous dependence on Mideast oil. By tapping American ingenuity, we can achieve that goal while growing our economy and protecting our environment. "

Now there's pie in the sky for you. The US has been trying to develop alternate sources of energy for decades. Does Kerry actually consider this a new idea. There are no economically viable alternative energy sources on the horizon. Here Kerry is basically saying that his "plan" is to have some miraculous break through of science rescue us from the terrorists. Of course Kerry will refuse to do the things that are actually available for us to do in order to reduce our dependence. He will not allow for the construction of nuclear plants and he will not allow drilling in Awar.

Like with everything else, Kerry has thrown out some empty pabulum that will sound good to his hynotized followers. They will never question what he said, or if they do they will generate their own interpretation that will satisfy what they hope that Kerry will do. Of course Kerry has intentionally left his statements so broad and general that his minions could do just that. He really has no answers to anything. But he has been able to fool the left into thinking that he does.

After returning from his four month service in Vietnam John Kerry became involved in the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW). Kerry served on the executive board of the VVAW and traveled the country giving speeches in it’s name. On January 31 to February 2, 1971 the VVAW sponsored an event in Detroit called the Winter Soldiers Investigation. The purpose of the investigation was to expose the atrocities that had been committed and were being committed by the US Military in the Vietnam war. Much of the money for the investigation was supplied by anti-war activists Jane Fonda and Mark Lane.

At the investigation over 100 Vietnam Veterans gave three days of grueling testimony about the atrocities that they had committed and witnessed in Vietnam. The basic thread was that horrible atrocities were the rule rather than the exception in Vietnam and that this condition was both known about and approved by the upper levels of the military. The American soldier and his entire chain of command were painted as war criminals. The stories were recorded by the Detroit Free Press, who later tried to corroborate the stories.

Seven month later John Kerry testified to the Fulbright Committee, repeated the stories that he had heard at the Winter Soldiers meeting, and added his own testimony of witnessing and participating in atrocities. The Fulbright Committee was a Senate committee of anti-war senators with an agenda of trying to get the US out of the Vietnam war.

But getting back to the Winter Soldiers meeting, it is important to present the investigation into the investigation. The Detroit Free Press tried to contact many of the Veterans for further details about their stories. The US military began an investigation into the allegations. Later, after Kerry’s speech, anti war senator Mark Hatfield also called for an investigation into the charges.

They found that eleven of the people who testified at the winter soldiers meeting about their military experiences in Vietnam had never been to Vietnam and never been in the military. Other Veterans from the meeting who were contacted by various journals testified that they had never been to the meeting. In fact, some of them testified that they had never been to Detroit, nor were they anti-war. Apparently some of the Winter Soldiers had testified by using the names of people that they knew to be Veterans. Along with the fraud that was committed in identifying themselves, none of the stories that the Winter Soldiers told could be verified by anyone. The times, places, and circumstances that were laid out were either too vague to investigate or they were simply untrue.

The head of the VVAW while Kerry was on the executive board was Al Hubbard. Hubbard had claimed to be an Air Force captian and pilot who had served in Vietnam and who had been wounded in action. When the military investigated Mr. Hubbard it was found that he had only been a Sergeant and he had never been assigned to or served in Vietnam. The fraudulent testimony of the Veterans at the Winter Soldiers meeting was made possible because the VVAW never asked for evidence, sworn testimony, or corroboration of any of the claims. The organization had a political agenda and anything that would serve that agenda was accepted without question.

While the objective of the VVAW was mainly anti-war, they also formed loose working associations with other groups like the Black Panthers and communist organizations like Student for a Democratic Society and the People’s Coalition of Peace and Justice. As the organization became more radical in nature Kerry actually took part in a meeting where the subject of discussion was the assassination of Senators and Congressmen who supported the war. And while Kerry did not support these plans, it nevertheless shows the kind of organization that he choose to associate himself with.

The aim of the VVAW and the Winter Soldiers Investigation was to get the US out of the war by turning popular opinion against it. To that end Kerry and the VVAW were willing to turn all of the men who had served, been wounded and died in Vietnam into war criminals. To that end they wanted to paint the entire chain of command, all the way to the President as war criminals. If they had to lie to get what they wanted, it never made them hesitate. Because of the actions of men like John Kerry we lost a war that we could have won and the Vietnam Veterans were the first soldiers to ever return to the US to be scorned by their country.

The multitude of Veterans that returned from Vietnam listened to Kerry and the anti-war crowd and they knew that what was being said about them was a lie. Their experiences did not correspond to the picture of them as Ghengis Khan raping the country that Kerry painted. They were deeply offended. Yes attrocities occurred in Vietnam just as they have occurred in every war that has ever been fought. But they were the exception not the rule. And they were not authorized or supported by the chain of command as Kerry claimed.

From "America in Vietnam" by Guenter Lewy, pp.317:
"Many of the veterans, though assured that they would not be questioned about atrocities they might have committed personally, refused to be interviewed. One of the active members of the VVAW told investigators that the leadership had directed the entire membership not to cooperate with military authorities. A black Marine who agreed to be interviewed was unable to provide details of the outrages he had described at the hearing, but he called the Vietnam War "one huge atrocity" and "a racist plot." He admitted that the question of atrocities had not occurred to him while he was in Vietnam, and that he had been assisted in the preparation of his testimony by a member of the Nation of Islam. But the most damaging finding consisted of the sworn statements of several veterans, corroborated by witnesses, that they had in fact not attended the hearing in Detroit. One of them had never been to Detroit in all his life. He did not know, he stated, who might have used his name." ----

Paul Galanti learned of Kerry's speech while held captive inside North Vietnam's infamous "Hanoi Hilton" prison. The Navy pilot had been shot down in June 1966 and spent nearly seven years as a prisoner of war. During torture sessions, he said, his captors cited the antiwar speeches as "an example of why we should cross over to [their] side." "The Viet Cong didn't think they had to win the war on the battlefield," Galanti said, "because thanks to these protesters they were going to win it on the streets of San Francisco and Washington."

Steve Pitkin testifies how he was used by Kerry and the Winter Soldiers.

Here is a leaflet that Kerry and the VVAW published accusing our soldiers of being war criminals.

John Kerry received his first purple heart as a result of action on 2 December, 1968. The problem seems to be that it was Kerry's own action that caused his wound.

The first thing to note is that while Kerry's web site contains the action reports for his second and third purple hearts, the action report for his first purple heart is conspicously missing.

So let's look at the testimony that was given about the event. First we have Kerry's own statement.

"The entire sky seemed to explode into daylight. The men from the sampans bolted erect, stiff with shock for only an instant before they sprang for cover like a herd of panicked gazelles . "We opened fire," he went on. "The light from the flares started to fade, the air was full of explosions. My M-16 jammed, and as I bent down in the boat to grab another gun, a stinging piece of heat socked into my arm and just seemed to burn like hell. By this time one of the sailors had started the engine and we ran by the beach, strafing it. Then it was quiet. "

Then we have the account of Admiral William Schachte (US Navy retired) who was in charge of the boat that Kerry was on that night.

“My gun jammed after the first burst and I was trying to clear my weapon. John’s gun apparently jammed too,” says Schachte. “I heard the old familiar ‘Thump-pow!’ and I look, and John had fired the M-79 grenade launcher. And there was silence. That’s when I realized that he had nicked himself.”

This quote comes from an interview with NBC's Lisa Myers. Lisa continued her questioning of Schachte and it went like this:

Lisa Myers: You have absolutely no doubt that he injured himself accidentally?”

Adm. William Schachte: There was no other fire. There were no muzzle flashes. There was nothing coming at us from the beach.

Myers: There was no enemy fire involved.

Schachte: None.

Myers: You’re absolutely certain?

Schachte: Yes.

Myers: 36 years later?

Schachte: Hey, listen, when somebody’s shooting at you, you know it.

Myers: But you are, in a sense, saying Senator Kerry is lying and did not deserve his Purple Heart.

Schachte: I’m saying that he did not deserve the first Purple Heart from what I saw. You can characterize it anyway you want.”

Later Kerry went to have the tiny piece of shrapnel removed from his arm. The doctor who treated him was Dr. Louis Letson. This is his testimony.

"I know John Kerry is lying about his first purple heart, because I treated him for that injury."

"The fragment was about the size of a match stick," Letson said. "It was sticking out of his arm. I grabbed it out and put a Band Aid on it. It didn't require an anesthesia or sutures."

More recently an inspection of Kerry's personal logs show that he made an entry nine days after this event in which he said that he 'hadn't been shot at yet,'

Since the exposure of Kerry's log the Kerry campaign has backtracked and admitted that the wound might have been self inflicted. The assertions of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth were verified.

With Some Women, Life is Impossible Unless You Carry a Rod

8/27/2004

The following are excerpts from a Friday sermon aired live on Qatar TV on
August 27:

We must know that [wife] beating is a punishment in Islamic religious law. No one should deny this because this was permitted by the Creator of Man, and because when you purchase an electric appliance or a car you get instructions - a catalogue, explaining how to use it. The Creator of Man has sent down this book [the Koran] in order to show Man which ways he must choose.

We shouldn't be ashamed before the nations of the world who are still in their days of ignorance, to admit that these [beatings] are part of our religious law. We must remind the ignorant from among the Islamic Nation who followed the [West], that those [westerners] acknowledge the wondrous nature of this verse. There are three types of women with whom life is impossible without beatings.

In America six million women are beaten by their husbands every year. These are their own official statistics. 4000-6000 women die as a result of their husbands' beatings. London police, every year, answer 100,000 phone calls and complaints of attacks against wives. In France, their slogan is, "Beat the wife morning, noon and night, and don't ask her why - she knows the reason." But they use their media to blow this out of proportion. They blow what is happening in the Muslim countries out of proportion. They bring a woman from South-Eastern Asia with a swollen face and present her on TV, claiming this was done by a Muslim who attacked his wife. They forget that Islam is a religion that forbids beating the face even of beasts. It is forbidden to beat even a donkey on its face.

The intelligent people in the [West] admit that a woman does not feel comfort and is not happy unless she's under a man who commands, forbids, controls, and leads. This is the nature of people according to Allah's creation. Allah has created woman, whether Muslim or infidel, so she is happy under a strong man who will protect her and lives with her. It is not surprising, then, that a French woman came before a judge in the land of false freedom and equality and said: "I don't want this husband." The judge asked her: "Why?" and she replied: "He didn't lead me, didn't oppress me, didn't castigate me, didn't talk to me violently, didn't say: Don't do this, do that." The judge replied: "Don't [his actions] support those who call for equality between man and woman?" The infidel woman answered, "No, no, I don't want him to compete with me, I want a man who leads and rules me."

This is the nature according to which Allah created people, but they contaminated and replaced it with licentiousness and evil. A woman there knows that she lost the battle, and was mislead in the worst way, and she became like gum that the husband chews and throws into the filthy garbage can.

[The Koran says:] "and beat them." This verse is of a wondrous nature. There are three types of women with whom a man cannot live unless he carries a rod on his shoulder. The first type is a girl who was brought up this way. Her parents ask her to go to school and she doesn't - they beat her. "Eat" - "I don't want to" - they beat her. So she became accustomed to beatings, she was brought up that way. We pray Allah will help her husband later. He will only get along with her if he practices wife beating.

The second type is a woman who is condescending towards her husband and ignores him. With her, too, only a rod will help. The third type is a twisted woman who will not obey her husband unless he oppresses her, beats her, uses force against her, and overpowers her with his voice.