 |
Coincidence? He doesn't think so. Terrorists for Bush?By Rick Horowitz I like to think I keep up with things. If something important is going on in the news, I try to read about it, learn about it. Sometimes keeping up with things simply means learning the facts, but sometimes it means connecting the facts. Occasionally it even means reaching conclusions about those connections. For instance? I've now reached the conclusion that the terrorists hate John Kerry. Hate him, hate him, hate him. This wasn't a conclusion I came to lightly, you understand, and I'm certainly open to reconsidering my position. But I can't think of any other way to explain what's been happening lately. Maybe you've noticed it, too: Every time John Kerry looks as if he's ready to jump ahead of George Bush in the presidential race, there's another flurry of terrorist activity somewhere in the world, and everyone gets distracted and nervous, and the Kerry "surge" turns into a Kerry "blip" -- or even a Bush "blip." It sounds crazy, but it's true. Is al-Qaeda watching CNN? Remember a few weeks before the Democratic convention, when Kerry picked John Edwards to be his running mate? Everyone was saying what a good job Kerry was doing of introducing Edwards to the voters, and how attractive and energetic they (and their families) seemed together, and what a smart pick Edwards was, even if his foreign-policy credentials weren't the strongest part of his resume -- And suddenly Tom Ridge and his colleagues were standing in front of the cameras talking about all the new terrorist threats out there and what if we have to postpone the elections and -- Actually, come to think of it, he wasn't actually reporting on any new terrorist threats. He was just putting out one of his periodic "updates," letting people know that the Bush administration was on the job, tracking down the bad guys and considering every option. But if al-Qaeda didn't want Tom Ridge getting in the way of the Edwards story, they wouldn't have given him so many reasons to talk about them, would they? And how about during the convention? The Democrats had stayed amazingly united through the first three days, and they'd had all these fine speeches about John Kerry's bravery and heroism and all the rest. And then, just a few hours before Kerry's acceptance speech -- one of the absolutely key moments in any presidential campaign -- some major al-Qaeda operative gets himself captured in Pakistan or somewhere, so instead of Kerry having the limelight all to himself -- Actually, come to think of it, that major al-Qaeda operative was captured several days earlier; it's just that the administration didn't get around to announcing it until right before the Kerry speech. But al-Qaeda had to know when they let this guy be caught that it would take three or four days for the administration to process him and prepare the press release. Obviously, they were doing it to step on John Kerry's message. Al-Qaeda, I mean. And of course, there was all this latest to-do as soon as the convention was over, and before Kerry could lock in the full benefit of his bounce. Al-Qaeda was at it again, Tom Ridge declared; they'd been gathering all sorts of detailed information about specific targets in Washington and New York and Newark. If you weren't already totally distracted and nervous -- Although actually, come to think of it, it turns out that most of al-Qaeda's surveillance of those buildings wasn't new at all, but three or four years old. But it was still important information, no question, and al-Qaeda had to know that Tom Ridge would want to share it with the American people as soon as he could, even if he somehow neglected to mention how old most of it was. They also had to know that Tom Ridge is the kind of man who wouldn't dream of scaring the dickens out of the American people without also offering them some reassurance. Which, of course, is why he said, "We must understand that the kind of information available to us today is the result of the president's leadership in the war against terror." Just in case anyone was inclined to question the president's leadership in the war against terror. And they had to know -- al-Qaeda, that is -- that an endorsement like that would be a real boost for Bush at Kerry's expense, even if Tom Ridge never even considered that possibility, since, as he clearly explained, "We don't do politics in the Department of Homeland Security." You add it all up and it's obvious, isn't it? The terrorists are desperate to see John Kerry lose. And they're willing to do whatever it takes to keep George Bush in the White House for another four years. I mean, can you think of a better explanation? Posted 8/5/04. Exaggerated
evidence? Manipulated evidence? Even the thought of it is enough to
get Rick Horowitz to break out in lyrics! For top-notch parody -- produced
and performed by some top-notch Nashville talent
-- just
click
here.
|
  |
Rick Horowitz
