John Forbes Kerry – Domestic Terrorist

PipeLineNews.org ^ | March 19, 2004 | William A. Mayer

[CyberAnt]

Well .. it goes along with the testimony Kerry gave before Congress where he was willing to say he witnessed brutal acts by other soldiers .. but never reported them to superior officers.

[johnqueuepublic]

"That's a pretty strong statement!"

Victory through strength.

[johnqueuepublic]

thx for the correction that time works better for me anyway.

planning on taping that and playing with it later.

[syriacus]

its a Drudge story but I havent seen it anywhere.

I can only find it on Rush and Newsmax.

Even on Vacation, Kerry's Foul Mouth Gets No Rest, Friday, March 19, 2004

Well, it turns out Hillary Clinton isn't the only one to use abusive language against Secret Service agents. Foulmouthed John "F." Kerry, noted for his obscenity-laced Web site and naughty interview with Rolling Stone, is at it again.

Trying to relax at the mansion in Idaho to avoid further meltdown, the Massachusetts Democrat saw his photo opportunity on the ski slopes go awry.

The New York Times reported today that Kerry rammed into one of his protectors, fell down and had himself a snow sandwich.

Owwww. The most painful flip-flop of all.

"When asked about the mishap a moment later, he said sharply, 'I don't fall down,' then used an expletive to describe the agent who 'knocked me over.'"

Hmm. If the FCC starts fining Kerry the way it's going after Howard Stern, Mrs. K will have to manage her investments better.

---------------

I can just imagine what "President" Kerry's Fireside chats would be like.

My fellow citizens, Today we stand tall as we pause to raise our [bleep] hands ...

[syriacus]

testimony Kerry gave before Congress where he was willing to say he witnessed brutal acts by other soldiers

Today I was thinking....

If Kerry knew of brutal incidents, shouldn't Kerry have fought to have the the "bad behavior" of the soldiers punished?

Why did the alleged brutal acts by our GIs mean we had to withdraw from Vietnam?

That response only teaches unwilling soldiers that they can end a war by (the mere threat of) behaving brutally.

[Scarfo]

I want to remind everyone that Martha Stewart is going to do a year in the can just for fibbing to the feds. Isn't the penalty for plotting to assassinate sitting Senators at least as severe?

[Michael.SF.]

You still seemingly grasp my point. I stated previously I am not arguing the facts of what you have stated, so the proverbial ball you are referring to was never in anyone's court. Let me give a few examples of how your post sounds:

BUSH IS A DESERTER!

CLINTON'S KILLED VINCE FOSTER!

KERRY IS A DOMESTIC TERRORIST!

RUMSFELD IS GUILTY OF WAR CRIMES!!

All of the above comments can be argued as having merit by those who make them. In some cases the case may be better then in others. However, in all cases those statements make the person who made them seem to be an extremist, hell bent on a specific narrow agenda.

There is plenty of ammunition to defeat Kerry w/o using the bombast that is being used in this post.

[Michael.SF.]

Thank you, Hon.

Regards

Michael

[Michael.SF.]

What happened to Hon and Mikey? .... are these guys the type who post and run?

well, johnny, if you must know, since I posted earlier I have run to the hardware store twice, while I was replacing toilet seats in the upstairs and downstairs bath rooms. I also went for a two mile walk down by the waterfront with my wife. I then took an old American Flag to a church where an Eagle scout candidate was offering to properly dispose of American flags, complete with a playing of taps. I then had the car washed by some kids doing a fundraiser to pay for their trip to the Rose Parade in 2005.

And you?

I guess you have been at your computer all day.

[Truth Table]

There is plenty of ammunition to defeat Kerry w/o using the bombast that is being used in this post.

D'ya think that the information in the post itself was bombastic, or just the label of domestic terrorist?

[CyberAnt]

At the very least, Kerry should have reported it. I believe he said most of those things because the people he got the information from were phoney-baloney - and that has been proven. Kerry was making the stuff up .. which now explains why he didn't report it.

Kerry's ego knows no bounds - just another Clinton/Gore piece of garbage liberal.

[Our man in washington]

I'll side with hon and michael.sf. on this one--mostly.

When things like this event come up, I like to play a game of "what probably really happened?" So what do we know about Kerry at that age?

1. He was already thinking about his future political viability.

2. He craved the limelight.

3. He felt comfortable in public, and seem to know how to handle the media and public relations. People I've known said he was an engaging speaker at the time.

4. He had a huge ego.

5. He was in his late twenties and having a position of public prominence that was perhaps beyond what a young man should have.

6. He saw things in the war he didn't like, and felt angry about them. Let's face it: being on a Swift boat is not for the squeamish, and officers have to make painful decisions under stress.

7. (And this is a maybe) He thought he would get easy duty in the Navy, and was a little resentful at having to serve on a Swift Boat.

So, putting it all together, here's what I would guess happened. Kerry comes back from Vietnam and looks to get his name in lights. Being from a very leftist part of the country, he senses a lot of anger toward the war.

He's a bit shell-shocked himself, and feels comfortable expressing anger against the war. Because he's been there, friends immediately laud him for his stands. He hears about Vets against Vietnam, and rushes headlong into it without knowing a lot about it.

He has some discomfort at the more radical aspects of Vets against Vietnam, but ignores that because the organization is his ticket to prominence. A man seeking to become president some day is not going to want to overthrow the nation.

And then there's the Kansas City meeting. Kerry knew the group was a little strange, but this is off the scale. Seeking to kill Senators? Kerry knows he needs to get out, but he's addicted to the limelight. As he would many times later, he decides to be on both sides of the issue. He figures acting as the spokesman for now is harmless, especially since the plot went down to defeat. But the whole think makes Kerry nervous.

So can we call him a domestic terrorist? I don't think so. On his own, Kerry never would have advocated killing anyone. Had the plot not been defeated, my guess is Kerry would have reported it to the authorities.

The disturbing fact is that Kerry appeared to have no conscience throughout the whole episode. His whole goal was working toward getting elected to something. Right and wrong was just not part of the equation.

At the end, Kerry couldn't even defend or reject the Vets against Vietnam. His final calculus was "how can I milk the situation so as to get my name in the media without the embarrassment of being linked to some questionable people?"

If Kerry is elected and a terrorist attack happens, I fear that Kerry's first instinct will be "how can I use this attack to help get me in the polls?" That thinking can lead to very bad decisions.

[moonhawk]

Cut-and-run types who can't stand to hear anything bad about their boy.

[philetus]

I know what's going on. Kerry's campaine is being directed by Steven King.

[Michael.SF.]

or just the label of domestic terrorist?

Yes, I thought the label, and use of the word 'terrorist' was over the top.

[Michael.SF.]

Very well put.

Although I had not expressed it, your scenario parallels my thoughts and is far closer to the truth then the exaggerations indicated by the original post.

[lainde]

This story needs LEGS! And I'm hopeful. Every day it reappears from a new source.

[Fiddlstix]

BTTT

[johnqueuepublic]

Look Michael, you broached the initial challenge and in my opinion you are way out of your league.

Your argument doesn't even make any sense.

You agree that the main point of the article is correct, then you offer 3 preposterous statments by DU types that have no basis in fact from the left as evidence of...what?

I am not going to take the cheap shot with regard to SF.

[johnqueuepublic]

toilet seats???

I rest my case.