In regard to North Korea, Kerry feels that it is best to pretend that Kim Jong-il has not just violated an international treaty with the United States and developed nuclear weapons. Kerry may want to blame this development on the Bush Administration, but it takes far more than the year Bush was in office to develop a nuclear weapons program. No, in order to develop the WMD they now hold, North Korea would have had to systematically violate the treaty almost from the day it was signed by the Clinton Administration in 1994. The rigorous system of oversight and inspections stipulated by the treaty were easily side stepped by the North Koreans and now two of our closest allies, South Korea and Japan, have a psychopathic despot pointing nuclear weapons at their major cities. John Kerry's solution to this major crisis is to give into the demands of the North Koreans, pretend the last 10 years did not happen, and hold bilateral talks with North Korea, effectively ostracizing the nations most directly effected their nuclear threat.

What do you suppose the character of these negotiations would be? It is pretty simple, North Korea will want its oil, food, medicine, and humanitarian aid back that was cut off by Bush with the violation of the old treaty with a new caveat where the United States would accept and forgive their development of atomic weapons. What would we get? Nothing but promises from a regime that has proven itself unable to abide by an international treaty. John Kerry may claim that the guarantee of North Korea dismantling its WMD is worth the price of abandoning our values and risking millions of lives, but what does Senator Kerry plan to do if North Korea violates this treaty just like they ignored the last? Set up another round of negotiations begging them to just tell us how much we have to give them live up to their word?

John Kerry has a similar plan in regard to Iran's nuclear weapons program. Oh, I am sorry, peaceful nuclear power program. First, Iran needs nuclear power about as much as Bill Gates needs food stamps. The entire country is floating on an ocean of oil! Iran's history does not need retelling. Since 1979, Iran has been the single greatest promoter and exporter of terrorism and civil unrest in the world. A nuclear Iran, in any capacity, is an unacceptable risk. Rather than working to stop the threat, Kerry will give up all opposition to Iran having nuclear capabilities and actually supply them with the enriched uranium fuel they need in exchange for international inspections. Kerry's reasoning goes that if the Iranians refuse such a good deal, they must be up to no good. The United States can then go to the United Nations and begin the process to impose stiff economic sanctions.

Kerry's plan is flawed in two respects. First, Kerry assumes that Iran will refuse the deal if they actually want to develop nuclear weapons. But what if Iran decides to agree to the deal, receives the fuel, and then embarks on a concerted program to either deceive or stall the inspectors in order to accelerate their WMD development? North Korea is far less capable a nation than Iran and they seemed to have no problem avoiding international oversight, so what is stopping the Iranians? Their good word and history of peaceful temperance?

Second, Kerry assumes that our allies and the United Nations would enact touch economic sanctions on the Iranians. This might sound reasonable until you realize that the Iranian nuclear power plants are being built by the Russians with help from the Germans and other companies from EU nations. There is no way the Russians and our European "allies" will take anything other than symbolic action against Iran when they have billions of Euros at stake. More than likely, they will repeat their actions with the Iraqi Oil for Food Program and the failed Iraqi sanctions, doing a lot of sanctimonious moralizing while profiting from their duplicity on the side.

If John Kerry is elected President, in four years we will have a nuclear Iran and North Korea attempting to spread WMD to other nations around the world and terrorist groups. North Korea will sell anything to anyone so long as their money is green and American. Iran will give anything to a terrorist group so long as it can kill lots of Jews. Rather than addressing this threat, Kerry has decided to bury his head in the sand and pretend that he is not dealing with the Axis of Evil, but misunderstood problem states who only need a little understanding to become good global citizens. This November, Americans will be voting on faith that their candidate is the most competent for office. But if we vote for John Kerry, by the time the next election rolls around, we may be needing our faith to see us through the nuclear nightmare a Kerry Administration could create.

As you know, I'm going off on my book tour to talk about The Covenant, a novel that tells the truth about Palestinian terrorism, and the ordinary Israelis who have been fighting on the front lines for years. By the time I come back, the election for President of the United States will be over and done, and we won't have this bone of contention to deal with, you and I. This is my last word on this topic.

But before I go, I'd like to tell you how it makes me feel when people on my list write me that I should butt out of the U.S. election because I live in Israel. People who write me that George W. Bush is an idiot because he doesn't care about the environment or healthcare, or abortions. That he lied about WMD, and shouldn't have gone into Iraq or Afghanistan. That it's his fault the war on terror is going badly. That they are proudly going to vote for his opponent, John Kerry, and give me a long list of reasons why.

It makes me sickeningly angry and depressed. And this is why:

I remember seeing my mother -in- law, who survived Auschwitz, and my father-in -law, whose first young wife and two babies were gassed there, wearing gas masks and sitting in a sealed room with their children and great-grandchildren, because Saddam Hussein was logging bombs at us and we were afraid he'd gas us as he did thousands of Kurds, his own people.

I remember watching the families of suicide bombers who killed hundreds of Israelis in the streets of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and Netanya getting checks for $25,000 from Saddam Hussein.

I remember my daughter going to get gas masks for my grandchildren in the recent war because we were afraid Saddam Hussein would do it again.

I remember Arafat and Rabin on the lawn of the White House with President Clinton smiling, forcing them to shake hands. I remember the dozens of times Arafat came to the White House and was welcomed like a world leader. I remember Clinton's silence when the Intifada started, and how I felt when he wouldn't come out and condemn the Palestinians for breaking the agreements; when he suddenly backed off, talking about how both sides in the conflict were responsible.

I remember Clinton at the Democractic Convention, shaking hands with Kerry.

I remember Jimmy Carter and his numerous attempts to harm Israel during the Intifada, trying to tie it's leaders hands at defending us, shaking hands with Kerry.

I remember how finally, after September 11, we had a President in the White House that let us go after terrorists at home. A President that despite the lack of support of Israel's enemies: the U.N., France, Germany, and the rest of the EU who had been kissing Arafat's backside for years while he killed our children, decided to take out Saddam Hussein, and who did it, brilliantly in a few weeks, despite all the media naysayers and back biters.

Thank you George W. Bush. For getting Saddam Hussein off Israel's back so my children and my in-laws can put away their gas masks for good. Thank you George W. Bush, for passing the Patriot Act, which outlaws terrorist funding, and for going after the bankers who fund the murder of our children.

Thank you George W. Bush, for understanding there is an Axis of Evil, and for putting Syria and Iran on it.

Thank you, George W. Bush, for saving millions of women and girls from a fate worse than death by getting rid of the Taliban, so they can go to a doctor, go to school, and not be stoned publicly for not walking around like little tents.

For all those of you who haven't made up their minds. I hope this will help you.

As for those who sincerely believe they love Israel but are voting for John Kerry, I'd like to say this:

You are voting for a who wants to bring the US closer to France whose Ambassador to England called Israel " that s****y little country "; whose former Prime Minister called the establishment of Israel a "historic mistake" ; who has seen the most anti-Semitism of any European nation since World War Two;who willingly supplied Hussein not just with weapons but also with the nuclear reactor that Israel destroyed in 1981; and who continues to supply nuclear technology to Iran whose desire for nuclear weapons to destroy Israel is well known. A man who wants closer ties with the EU, who continues to supply funds being used by the Palestinians to commit terror attacks. A man who wants approval from the UN, whose ambulances ferry terrorists in Gaza to plant bombs to kill Israeli soldiers.

You are voting for a man who told the Arab-American Institute last year "how disheartened Palestinians are by the Israeli government's decision to build a barrier off the Green Line, cutting deeply into Palestinian areas" and went on to say that "We do not need another barrier to peace... and that provocative and counterproductive measures only harm Israel's security over the long term." A fence which has reduced terror attacks to almost nothing in it's areas,
saving thousands of Israeli lives.

A man who denounced the 'endless cycle of violence and reprisals" thereby equating Israel's defensive measures to root out killers to the murder of innocent Israelis by Palestinian terrorists; a man whose much touted "solid Senatorial record on votes for Israel" amounts to painless offers of moral support written and introduced by others. A man who in 2000 didn't join 60 co-sponsors of the "Middle East Peace Process Support Act" - a bill calling on the President not to recognize a unilaterally declared Palestinian state; a man who failed to co-sponsor a pro-Israel "Peace Through Negotiations Act." Who in
1993 failed to join 55 Senators in signing the Grassley/Lautenberg letter to the State Department, demanding that Hamas be listed as a terrorist organization. Who did not support the assassination of Sheikh Yassin. A man who surrounds himself with Mideast "experts" like Sandy Berger, who said in May 2000 that Palestinian violence was " a blessing " because it might speed up the egotiating process; Martin Indyk an ex-Ambassador to Israel who recently told Israel to unilaterally give up the strategically vital Golan Heights to Syria
because it was the only way to get rid of Hezbollah violence, who is widely known as Arafat's Yes-Man .

You are voting for a slick, multi-millionaire dilettante, who in twenty years in the Senate only managed to author, or co-author the following bills. (See http://www.factcheck.org/article282.html for all bills and the details )

S.1206: Names a federal building in Waltham, Massachusetts after Frederick C. Murphy, who was killed in action during World War II and awarded (posthumously) the Medal of Honor. (1994) a..

S.1636: A save-the-dolphins measure aiming "to improve the program to Reduce the incidental taking of marine mammals during the course of commercial fishing operations." (1994)

S.1563: Funding the National Sea Grant College Program, which supports university-based research, public education, and other projects "to promote better understanding, conservation and use of America's coastal resources." (1991)

S.423: Granting a visa and admission to the U.S. as a permanent resident to Kil Joon Yu Callahan. (1987)

H.R.1900 (S.300) Awarded a congressional gold medal to Jackie Robinson (posthumously), and called for a national day of recognition. (2003)

H.R.1860(S.856): Increased the maximum research grants for small
businesses from $500,000 to $750,000 under the Small Business Technology Transfer Program. (2001)

S.J.Res.158: To make the week of Oct. 22 Oct. 28, 1989 "World Population Awareness Week." (1989)

S.J.Res.160: To renew "World Population Awareness Week" for 1991. (1991)

S.J.Res.318: To make Nov. 13, 1992 "Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th
Anniversary Day." (1992)

S.J.Res.337: To make Sept. 18, 1992"National POW/MIA Recognition Day."
(1992)

S.Res.123: To change the name of the Committee on Small Business to the
"Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship." (2001)

S.Res.133: To make May 21, 1991 "National Land Trust Appreciation Day."
(1991)

S.Res.144: To encourage the European Community to vote to ban driftnets for all European Community fishing fleets. (1991 )

S.Res.216: Honoring Milton D. Stewart for his leadership and service at the Small Business Administration. (2002)

S.Con.Res.26: Calling for the United States to support a new agreement providing for a ban on commercial mining of minerals in Antarctica. (1991)

For all those of you who decide that you prefer this man to one who (in the words of one list-member) "took out Saddam Hussein, stepped on Arafat's neck, backed Israel's war on the terrorists, and gave the EU and UN Palestinian apologists the mighty finger" what can I say?

I wish you the joy of your conscience come voting day.

I'd also like to say this: If George W. Bush is elected (please God), do I expect him to do things I won't like? Do I expect him to pressure Israel into doing things I don't approve of? You bet I do, I'm not naive. But given my choice, I also expect to be around at the end of the next four years to vote again. With Kerry, I'm not so sure.

The commentary is from Matthew Manweller, a political science professor at Central Washington University. Here is the text of that commentary:
"In that this will be my last column before the presidential election, there will be no sarcasm, no attempts at witty repartee. The topic is too serious, and the stakes are too high.

This November we will vote in the only election during our lifetime that will truly matter. Because America is at a once-in-a-generation crossroads, more than an election hangs in the balance. Down one path lies retreat, abdication and a reign of ambivalence. Down the other lies a nation that is aware of its past and accepts the daunting obligation its future demands. If we choose poorly, the consequences will echo through the next 50 years of history. If we, in a spasm of frustration, turn out the current occupant of the White House, the message to the world and ourselves will be two-fold.

First, we will reject the notion that America can do big things. Once a nation that tamed a frontier, stood down the Nazis and stood upon the moon, we will announce to the world that bringing democracy to the Middle East is too big a task for us. But more significantly, we will signal to future presidents that as voters, we are unwilling to tackle difficult challenges, preferring caution to boldness, embracing the mediocrity that has characterized other civilizations. The defeat of President Bush will send a chilling message to future presidents who may need to make difficult, yet unpopular decisions. America has always been a nation that rises to the demands of history regardless of the decisions. America has always been a nation that rises to the demands of history regardless of the costs or appeal. If we turn away from that legacy, we turn away from whom we are.

Second, we inform every terrorist organization on the globe that the lesson of Somalia was well learned. In Somalia, we showed terrorists that you don't need to defeat America on the battlefield when you can defeat them in the newsroom. They learned that a wounded America can become a defeated America. Twenty-four hour news stations and daily tracing polls will do the heavy lifting, turning a cut into a fatal blow. Except that Iraq is Somalia times 10. The election of John Kerry will serve notice to every terrorist in every cave that the soft underbelly of American power is the timidity of American voters. Terrorists will know that a steady stream of grizzly photos for CNN is all you need to break the will of the American people. Our own self-doubt will take it from there. Bin Laden will recognize that he can topple any American administration without setting foot on the homeland.

It is said that America's WWII generation is its "greatest generation." But my greatest fear is that it will become known as America's "last generation." Born in the bleakness of the Great Depression and hardened in the fire of WWII, they may be the last American generation that understands the meaning of duty, honor, and sacrifice. It is difficult to admit, but I know these terms are spoken with only hollow detachment by many (but not all) in my generation. Too many citizens today mistake "living in America" as "being an American." But America has always been more of an idea than a place. When you sign on, you do more than buy real estate. You accept a set of values and responsibilities. This November, my generation, which has been absent too long, must grasp that 100 years from now historians will look back at the election of 2004 and see it as the decisive election of our century. Depending on the outcome, they will describe it as the moment America joined the ranks of ordinary nations; or they will describe it as the moment the prodigal sons and daughters of the greatest generation accepted their burden as caretakers of the City on the Hill."