Skip to comments.Kerry: Chemical Weapons 'Undeniable'
Posted on 08/26/2013 12:38:01 PM PDT by Hotlanta Mike
Secretary of State John Kerry says the use of chemical weapons in Syria is "undeniable" and that the U.S. is considering how to respond:
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/aug/9/20040809-090612-9480r/#ixzz2d6cIKGhB Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
We supplied em!
I’m oh so glad you straightened that out for me, Johnnie.
Why is Obama hiding and suckering Kerry into making the announcement
And he knows this because the MB and al Queda in Syria told him so. Now he wants to jump in and support terrorists.
Secretary of State Kerry knows a little something about lies and exaggeration. I’m surprised he took this bait so readily. Or, maybe, this all a charade to justify backing the Muslim Brotherhood.
I beg to differ. It is COMPLETELY deniable.
The Caliphate will be created to have one entity to deal with. No matter what.
No Kidding....Captain Obvious....the question is....are you going to keep supplying them to the MB?
If kerry says it is undeniable then you can bet the farm that it never happened.
My thoughts exactly!
Gee, I wonder where they got them.....well, unless John Kerry, who served in vietnam, is lying...
In this case the enemy of my enemy is also my enemy, no matter which side we join.
You forgot to mention that he was listening to Cambodians singing Christmas Carols. What date is Christmas in Cambodia?
For all the complaints about him, Kucinich was the only one holding together the antiwar sentiment. The Republicans in OH gerrymandered him out of his HOR seat and saved an incompetent and racist Obama lapdog.
After much deliberation and consternation, they will respond with a strongly worded letter of condemnation.
Done. This is child’s play for our current Executive Branch. They are working on conquering America. Why would they care about war in the ME?
This is, of course, precisely what this very same cast of clowns has been screaming at Bush for all these years. Apparently it’s not a “reckless rush to war” when they’re doing it.
WMDs??? We are going to war over WMDs? Well MSM, where are you demandining irrefutable proof after the claim Bush lied over WMDs?
Just as undeniable as “climate change”?
Guess you don't remember Powell at the UN.
This is all a snow job that the President has no choice when in fact they do. It don't make any difference which party is president. War is their only option or the world will call them chicken. There are no more Reagans who had the balls to pull out from Lebanon.
FU RD [Republican and Democrat] I'm going Third.
As much as I detest the man Kerry did wear the uniform and he did serve in Vietnam, so I do not think ‘chicken hawk’ is applicable (at least not from my understanding of the word)
They want a pretext so bad ....
Frikkin' .. DUHHHH !
CYA and FUJK
“Kerry: Chemical Weapons ‘Undeniable’”
Yes, john. We know. Some of them showed up on your face.
Wow, can i break out the “Where are the WMDs?” bumper stickers I scraped off my car when I bought it from a hippie?
“By any standard, it is inexcusable. And despite the excuses and equivocations that some have manufactured, it is undeniable.”
Oh. So we should get involved in inexcusably inhuman violations of human rights?
How about people who flog women and stone them? How about people who bury people alive, and rape women? How about people who crucify Christians? How about people who still traffic in slaves? How about people who stone other people to death? How about people who murder Coptic clergymen, harrass Coptic nuns and burn down Coptic Churches????
Get my point?
We see highly selective morality being demonstrated here - by a parcle of lying hypocritical Marxists.
If the State Dept and the Pentagon are not smart enough,
how about we ask Bozo the Clown or a Girl Scout.
Their answers: STOP ARMING al QAEDA!
The likeness is not coincidental. The sneer comes with the attitude and though process.
As everybody here knows, depictions of atrocities can be faked.
I still say there’s something wrong with a scene with multiple un-embalmed bodies laid out in the summer heat of Syria with no evidence of the changes that occur after death.
Somebody will need to come up with some serious proof of a security risk to the United States before I’d back sending young Americans.
March 27, 2011
On CBS’s Face the Nation, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was asked whether the Arab Spring would affect Syria. Assad’s father, Bob Schieffer pointed out, had killed 25,000 during an uprising. “There’s a different leader in Syria now,” responded Clinton. “Many of the members of Congress of both parties who have gone to Syria in recent months have said they believe he’s a reformer.”
Blast from the past:
‘Iraq is a long way from Ohio, but what happens there matters a great
deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use
nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is
the greatest security threat we face. And it is a threat against which
we must, and will, stand firm.
In discussing Iraq, we begin by knowing that Saddam Hussein, unlike
any other leader, has used weapons of mass destruction even against
his own people. In fact, he is a repeat offender, having used them
both in the battle and against his people.’
(but the talking points became Bush was the war monger.)
You know what. You think these muslim animals would be pulling this shiite if G.W. was still president.
I get a kick out of this the only reason these animals act like this is because there is no American presencs.
This is what you get when there is no American presence.
Bush was right about this.
But I don’t care if they kill each other other than the fact that they think they can bring it west.
Kerry says it’s undeniable.
Yeah: Like I would believe anything that a-hole says.
Were they treating the Rebels like Ghenghis Khan?
Those hollow points the DHS bought are illegal too.
My thoughts exactly.
Precisely what does Hussein and J F’ing Kerry hope to achieve by getting us involved in a civil war in Syria?
FLASHBACK: Kerry Voted Against Gulf War, Proposed Multilateral ‘New World Order’
Print Article Send a Tip
by Joel B. Pollak 28 Dec 2012 101 post a comment
Has John Kerry ever been right about any foreign policy issue, ever, when it counted?
On Jan. 11, 1991, Sen. Kerry took to the floor of the Senate to oppose the Gulf War and oppose the resolution authorizing President George H.W. Bush to use force to end Saddam Hussein’s brutal occupation of Kuwait.
“It is not, in my view, imperative that in the next few days we send soldiers to fight a war,” Sen. Kerry declared.
Instead of the American-led “new world order” that Bush seemed to be creating, Sen. Kerry said, the United States should aim for a different kind of “new world order”—one that emphasized the “collective security” efforts of the United Nations, and one that rejected a “Pax Americana” in favor of a multipolar internationalist system.
Sen. Kerry’s case against the war was that other options had not yet been exhausted. He urged that sanctions be given longer to work, arguing that since Saddam Hussein was not “winning” and the U.S. was not “losing,” the status quo could be tolerated. (He neglected to mention ongoing atrocities in Kuwait or threats to U.S. allies.)
In addition, Sen. Kerry argued, President Bush had not been sufficiently deferential to Congress. He had already sent so many troops to the region that many in Congress were under duress to offer their support, Kerry said. Peppering his 36-minute address with numerous references to the Vietnam War, he insisted that Congress had to be allowed to arrive at its own “independent” assessment of the options before war could be launched.
Sen. Kerry did not apply the same standard to President Barack Obama’s war in Libya in 2011, which was launched without consultation of any kind with Congress, much less a resolution authorizing the use of force.
Notably, Sen. Kerry also blasted Syria’s “support for terrorism.” He took quite a different tack in 2009 when, as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he led efforts to reach out to the Assad regime.
Thank you for being a courteous and patriotic person, but, in John Kerry’s case, “chicken hawk” would be a compliment. If you get a chance, please read over Kerry’s 1971 book The New Soldier. Kerry went to war with a camera to record his “heroism,” met with the enemy in Paris while he (Kerry) was in uniform, and lied to Congress.
Chicken S***t would be more appropriate.
Assad had stated repeatedly he would use chemical weapons if there were foreign intervention in Syria’s civil war. According to European and Israeli papers, US trained Syrian rebel troops crossed into Syria from Jordan a couple weeks ago. It was in the repelling of these troops that the gas was used.
UK Daily Mail has article in June about the US base in Jordan where they were training for this excursion: