Duplicity – Thy Name is Obamacrat

This is from Politco, the place where left wing know-it-alls get all their political insider talking points. Consider:

By JENNIFER EPSTEIN | Updated: 8/26/13 6:52 PM EDT
Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday called Syria’s use of chemical weapons “undeniable” and indicated that President Barack Obama is planning to take action in the coming days.

Setting the stage for eventual military intervention, Kerry said in a statement from the State Department that what is happening on the ground in Syria “is real and it is compelling” and requires a response from the international community. Attacks on civilians by Bashar Assad’s regime are, he said, “a moral obscenity” that “should shock the conscience of the world.”

“Make no mistake: President Obama believes there must be accountability for those who would use the world’s most heinous weapons against the world’s most vulnerable people. Nothing today is more serious, and nothing is receiving more serious scrutiny,” Kerry later added.

Now consider Kerry’s statement reported by Joel Roberts of CBS News on February 11th, 2009 as regards Bush representations and policies in justification for Operation Iraqi Freedom:

 “We should not have gone to war knowing the information that we know today,” Kerry said Wednesday on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “Knowing there was no imminent threat to America, knowing there were no weapons of mass destruction, knowing there was no connection of Saddam Hussein to al Qaeda, I would not have gone to war. That’s plain and simple.”

No imminent threat to America?? . . . check for duplicity

No weapons of mass destruction??   . . . check for duplicity  . . . not only did Saddam Hussein have them and use them, killing thousands of Kurdish citizens of his own country, he had extensive and wide spread production capability. WMD munitions, agents and production equipment made its way to Syria at the point of invasion by the US and coalition forces.

Knowing that there was no connection of Saddam Hussein to al Qaeda?? . . . check for ambidexterity . . .  the issue is support of terrorism . . . Syria is not generally associated with al Queda  . . . although its connections to other terrorist groups is said to exist.  Iraq under Hussein was a terrorist organization.

Democrats / liberals have been relentless in denouncing Bush during and after his presidency. Indeed how many times do we continue to see “Bush lied?”   The Democrat trolls in the blogosphere cannot address the issue of the war on terrorism without uttering those favorite words.

So what is the difference again between the validity of the justifications for war in Iraq and war on Syria?  I cannot think of Democrat politicians without thinking  insincerity, guile, hypocrisy, and fraud.     R Mall

0

0