The Very Survival Of The USA Depends On Your Vote !!

Published on October 2, 2004 By Patriot_Flamethrower In Politics

I am not being facetious. I am not being sarcastic. I am not being partisan. I am not being melodramatic. I am not being humorous. I am not being morbid. I am not being hysterical.

I am being HONEST with all of you. As HONEST as I can be.

If John F. Kerry is elected President Of The United States in November, our country will immediately be in grave danger. From the moment he is sworn in in January of 2005, we are all in danger of imminent attack and ultimate destruction by the Islamo-terrorists.

Please heed my words. John Kerry will NOT protect the citizens of the United States Of America. John Kerry will NOT look out for OUR interests. John Kerry will ONLY look out for HIS interests. John Kerry's history shows that John Kerry only CARES ABOUT JOHN KERRY. Al Qaeda and the other terrorist organizations KNOW this FACT, and they will act accordingly.

What happened on September 11, 2001 will be a drop in the bucket compared to what will happen to us once John Kerry takes office. The fight against Islamo-terrorism will be fought on U.S. soil again. Millions of American citizens will be murdered on U.S. soil.

John Kerry is an APPEASER. He believes that you win wars by TALKING, not by military action. If you honestly believe that trying to NEGOTIATE with Al Qaeda and the other Islamo-terrorist organizations will bring us lasting peace and safety, then John Kerry is your man.

If you believe in KILLING the Islamo-terrorists before they KILL US and OUR FAMILIES, then John Kerry is NOT your man.

Remember this date. Remember my words. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Keep American safe. Vote for George W. Bush.

Comments (Page 3)

rugbyshawn

on Oct 03, 2004

drmiler....I answered your question in the first paragraph with....

I'm guessing Merriam-Webster would be a good first place
Seriously though, the US can determine the legitimacy but they do not have to turn a deaf ear to our allies for advice. I don't see why it has to be "no allies" or "the UN controls us." Friends should listen to each other, take in each other's advice, and then make a wise, informed decision.

So I don't see what your problem is.....

I then expanded upon this point to show the differences between this administration and some previous ones. It's good to have historical reference when deciding whether what the current administration has done is the norm or not. The two examples I gave showed how 2 different presidents presented a legitimate case that was accepted by our allies and thus similar to Kerry's proposed approach. So Drmiler sorry for answering your question with facts, quotes and valid points....

I'll make it up to you....here's an article on Powell showing that our "legitimate" reason for invading Iraq (Iraq's WMD poses a real threat to the world because Saddam won't disarm) was not correct. It even comes from a favored source of yours NEWSMAX.

Link

Grim Xiozan

on Oct 03, 2004

DAMIT PEOPLE, CANT YOU GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD? WE NEED OIL!!! A COUPLE OF YEARS FROM NOW WHEN OIL IS OVER 100 DOLLARS A BARROW, AND THE WORLDS JOBLESS RATE IS OVER 15 PERCENT, YOU STUPID COMMIE LIBERALS WILL BE THE FIRST TO BITCH AND WHINE ABOUT IT ALL.

Rebellions in Nigeria, and problems in Sudan have caused prices to rise.

- GX

Politically Active

on Oct 03, 2004

I sometimes hear people saying that terrorists hope that Kerry will win. THIS IS ABSURD. They want a religious extremist to win so that their image of Americans as barbarians will be shared by the people they are trying to recruit as terrorists. George Bush is that religious extremist. He may be able to fight terrorism in the short term, but to prevent it from returning, he must not invoke local anger at the US. That only makes things worse.

Gideon MacLeish

on Oct 03, 2004

but if you really think that the US will become an Islamoterrorist state under Sharia if Kerry gets in then sure, I'll accept your offer.

One, I said I don't have the funds to back it anyway, two, it wasn't about us becoming an islamoterrorist state; your challenge centered on us failing to remain an independent nation.

Personally I remain questionable about how a nation can be considered "sovereign" if her ELECTED leaders must appeal to an APPOINTED council of international bozos for approval of her actions, as is increasingly becoming the case with the UN

Tarthesius

on Oct 03, 2004

I apologize for jumping into this discussion late, and perhaps addressing an old point. It seems fairly clear to me, and to some other analysts, that the increase in the intensity of hatred by radical Islamists toward the United States coincides quite cleanly with Mr. Bush taking office. Most unfortunately, there were two main actions that escalated these tensions. First, diplomats were pulled from a number of countries in the region. Secondly, the ongoing talks between Israel and Palestine, where the US was the world's only mutually acceptable moderator, were abandoned. Instead, Bush (later) dumped money into some defensive measures for Israel (to lower the risk of more suicide bombers), whilst continuing to ignore the Palestinians please for moderated discussions.

Clearly, the Israel/Palestine thing is a major source of tensions (with a very long and interesting history!). At the end of Clinton's term, many folks were complaining about how slow the peace process was progressing, but they weren't prepared for what would happen when the entire (delicate) web of diplomats was unceromoniously pulled from the region.

Think about it.

Dr. Tarthesius

PS I am concerned for the safety of my family, and should the election happen in the manner encouraged by the soul who started this thread, I have seriously considered (and will continue to do so) taking my six figure income to a country not so determined to make enemies around the world.

cactoblasta

on Oct 04, 2004

Personally I remain questionable about how a nation can be considered "sovereign" if her ELECTED leaders must appeal to an APPOINTED council of international bozos for approval of her actions, as is increasingly becoming the case with the UN

They don't have to; the US is sufficiently strong that it doesn't have to do anything unless it wants to. No other country or entity has the authority or the power to deny the US their desires even if there is the will to do so. Iraq is a case in point. Americans can claim all they want that they are being chained by the UN, but the chains are made of paper and can be broken with ease at any time. It's more masochism than slavery that keeps the US bound into the world system.

Dr Guy

on Oct 04, 2004

I'll bet you AUS$1000 that if John Kerry is elected the US will not cease to exist as a independent nation. And to be extra generous I'll give you four years - that's one term, right? If the US is still a sovereign state in four years time under John Kerry, then I win. If the Islamoterrorists have overthrown the government and instituted sharia, then you win.

What is $100AUS worth these days in US Dollars? Not trying to be sarcastic, just curious.

And altho I support Bush, I wont take the bet. It is a sucker bet. Will we be worse off than now? You bet! But Armageddon will not take place by then.

JakeD

on Oct 04, 2004

Heh
That was funny. Are you in opera?

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!