BROADSIDES

March 15, 2004

A Murderous Campaign Endorsement
You don't have to be a political scientist to understand why terrorist nations bombed Madrid just before Spain's parliamentary elections. It was their deadly way of endorsing Spanish Socialist leader Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero. (And let's be clear: "socialist" is a pleasant-sounding euphemism for "communist.")

During his campaign to oust Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar's Conservative Popular Party, Zapatero repeatedly opposed the liberation of Iraq and the war on terrorism, and vowed that he would withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq. With reckless anti-U.S. rhetoric that sounded as if it had been written by bin Laden himself, Zapatero gave the terrorists every incentive to undermine Aznar's reelection.

And undermine it, they did. To the tune of 200 lives.

With the help of terrorists, Zapatero defeated Aznar's Conservatives. And what was Zapatero's reward to those who ensured his election by murdering and maiming over a thousand of his countrymen? A prompt announcement that he would reverse Aznar's terrorism policy and order the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq.

There's no indication that Zaptero or his surrogates conspired with terrorists, though I wouldn't put anything past a communist. However, there can be no doubt that his policy positions encouraged terrorists and their patrons to fatally intervene in the Spanish elections and ensure the defeat of Prime Minister Aznar.

This is a presidential election year in the United States and, when addressing the liberation of Iraq and the war on terrorism, the Democrat challenger to President Bush is sounding much like Zapatero. John Kerry has carelessly crafted his candidacy in a such a way that his success in November is predicated upon something so awful and so adverse happening to the U.S. that voters will be moved to oust the incumbent.

And America's terrorist enemies are surely taking note.

So the question must be asked: having successfully twisted the outcome of the Spanish elections to their advantage by murdering scores of people, might Islamovermin attempt to undermine Bush's reelection effort with a strategically-timed, major attack on the United States?

Well, why wait for an answer which may result in another major loss of life?

Instead, the United States should move quickly to destroy the two remaining major patrons of Islamist terrorism: the terrorist regimes of Iran and Syria. Without the Iranian ruling mullahs and the Syrian Baathists, Islamist mercenaries will not have the financial and logistical support essential to their operations.

As long as the Iranian and Syrian regimes remain intact, terrorist efforts to violate the integrity of elections in free nations will continue. But if those regimes are toppled--and soon--President Bush can bolster the safety of American lives and ensure that the outcome of the November election is determined by American voters rather than Islamist thugs.

B. Sides @ 9:04 AM