Yes, his recognition of the evil of Al Qa'eda and their ilk places him head and shoulders above Kerry as a Presidential Candidate.
Quite. So any blunders he has made are of a strategic/military/political nature, not a moral nature. Kerry on the other hand has not demonstrated that he has the basic moral compass. So how could anyone possibly allow him to be voted in (for instance, by voting Libertarian)?
Have you read 1984? Are you familiar with the slogan "War Is Peace"? Do you not see that the "War On Terror" is just Bush's higher-stakes replacement for the "War On Drugs"?
Yes, yes, and no. The difference between the “War on Terrror” and the “War on Drugs” is that the war on drugs is an immoral quest. The war on terror, misnamed as it is, is an entirely moral endeavour. Likewise, in 1984 the wars were fake – the enemy was a fiction invented by the State. Here, the enemy is not fictitious.
Are you seriously suggesting that John Kerry doesn't think the atrocities of September 11 were wrong?
I don’t know the exact thought processes of John Kerry. How could I be, he’s not upfront about his thinking.
The point I’m making is that the election boils down to a very clear issue about the morality of American values. Did the US have the moral right to go into Iraq or not, a question which in my view goes straight to the heart of whether you understand whether 9/11 was right or wrong. Yes, that’s a package deal (not a straw man), but elections are a package deal, whether you like it or not. Anyone voting Kerry would also be endorsing Michael Moore, the BBC, Kofi Annan and ultimately, Saddam and OBL, precisely as you suggest. Hence my statement refers to “Kerry, and his ilk”.
If I were to defend a literal interpretation of my statement as it applies to Kerry (which I don’t think should be necessary given the context I've just provided), then I would say that he does not see the moral legitimacy of attacking Iraq (and hence by implication, the rights and wrongs of 9/11), which is why he is always bleating on about bringing the UN and the European “allies” into the fold. I have seen him argue that bringing in more allies would be a good strategic move because it would enhance the US’ intelligence capabilities, which is true as a strategic point. But by being intentionally unclear Kerry is also tapping into a package deal of his own, which is the belief that bringing in the UN would provide moral legitimacy where currently there is none.