What constitutes change?

The willingness to communicate privately with revolutionary forces? And favorably communicate, by the way…

The March 1 death strike by the Colombian army against
FARC warlord Raul Reyes broke open a trove of contacts in his computer.
So why did the name of Barack Obama turn up there?

Mighty good question. Here are more:

1. Is it true Obama would cut off Plan Colombia military
aid to our ally, which would serve the terrorist group FARC’s interests?

2. Does Obama still oppose a free trade agreement for Colombia, even
though that puts him on the same side as FARC in the debate?

3. Does Obama know or care that one of his staffers or supporters is
claiming to disclose his positions in secret meetings with FARC
terrorists outside government channels?

4. Can he tell us why his supporters would pass on such information to terrorists, and what he or she could gain from it?

5. Will Obama, as president, treat FARC as the serious terrorists they are, given that they still hold three Americans hostage?

These aren’t idle “gotcha” questions, by the way. Based on his
campaign so far, Obama favors meeting and negotiating with rogue
leaders without preconditions, passing secret messages to foreign
countries at odds with his public positions and tolerating Che-flag
wielding leftists among his supporters who advance a radical agenda in
his name.

Now that FARC seems to have an inside line to Obama’s campaign, maybe he ought to come tell voters what he really stands for.

It’s time to learn the reality behind the rhetoric.


Join Mercator today for free and get our latest news and analysis

Buck internet censorship and get the news you may not get anywhere else, delivered right to your inbox. It's free and your info is safe with us, we will never share or sell your personal data.

Be the first to comment

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.