Skip to comments.Will John Kerry Be Our War-Criminal-in-Chief?
Posted on 10/18/2004 6:42:58 PM PDT by narses
Despite my many on-air (television and radio) and in-print (virtual and literal) detailed discussions on John Kerrys sordid, treacherous past, and despite the admissions cited below, the junior senator from Massachusetts stands about an even chance of being elected to the presidency on 2 November. This grim fact makes me wonder if our nation has finally begun an inevitable slide into a moral abyss from which there is no escape. To that end, heres a final piece before the election on the traitorous, villainous man-whore known best as Hanoi John.
In testimony before the United States Senate Armed Services Committee on 22 April 1971, Lieutenant John Forbes Kerry USNR said: I have been to Paris. I have [secretly] talked . . . with the Provisional Revolutionary Government [the enemy] . . . Kerry went on to say that he agreed with all eight of Madame Binh's points . . .
Madame Binh was the Viet Congs lead representative in Paris.
One of Nguyen ThiMadame Binhs primary requirements was the surrender of US forces to the communists, which she said the Viet Cong demanded before American prisoners of war would be returned.
Yes, Lieutenant John Kerry USNR, by his own public admission, violated Article 104 (Aiding the Enemy, punishable by death), Article 92 (Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation, punishable as a court-martial may direct), and Article 100 (Subordinate Compelling Surrender, punishable by death) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by illegally meeting with the enemy and then championing their demands right on the floor of the United States Senate in one of the most infamous appearances in the Senates history.
Kerry also violated Section 904, Title 10, of the United States Code, which states:
Any person who . . . without proper authority, knowingly . . . communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly, shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.
Kerry also violated Section 953, Title 18, United States Code (the Logan Act):
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
On 6 May 2001, John Kerry admitted committing war crimes during an interview with Tim Russert on Meet the Press: I took part . . . in the burning of villages . . . [which is] contrary to the laws of warfare, all of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions.
To this day, Kerry refuses to estimate how many innocent women and children he intentionally roasted to death in the villages he set ablaze. None of the men in John Kerrys unit have admitted to burning villages, so we must either assume Kerry was out and about by himself on secret missions of murder and mayhem, or his men refused to participate in Kerrys crimes.
The time is nearly upon us to decide if it would serve our nation well to have an admitted traitor, arsonist and war criminal as our president.
Cast your votes, America.
Kerry's campaign slogan has been "Safe at home, respected in the world". How respected would an admitted war criminal be as Commander-in-Chief? I'm not just confused, I am horrified that the ABB crowd would led their irrational hate for Bush be more important to them than electing, during WARTIME for God's sake, a war criminal, coward, and traitor.
There's still hope. As long as the good people of America know that Bush is a better leader and the better choice in the "post 9/11" society of today, then there will be no reason to fret.
Compared to those two, President Bush's National Guard service makes him a WAR HERO,,,,but then again
compared to those two,,,,
B) Prosecution to the fullest extent of the law.
They would show their 'graciousness' but letting the President slide and not going after the death penalty...
Jenjis John supports the ICC. I say we "try" before we buy. We can have them put him on trial for his war crimes. Let's see how that goes, then we can not join.
Nah. He's going stay the junior Senator from MA.
NO and NO!
The Boston Globe wrote:
"Sen. John Forbes Kerry's trip to Nicaragua bears out what many relatives on the Forbes side of the family, and most politicians who know him, contend. He's a shrewd opportunist whose personal political ambitions dictate every move he makes.
The arrogance he often displays came through in his boastful assertion last week that his conversations with the Sandinistas 'were longer than any the Secretary of State has had with the Nicaraguan government in five years.'"
Below are the most relevant excerpts from a series of articles that appeared in the Boston Globe in 1985.
KERRY, HARKIN ARRIVE IN MANAGUA
Published on April 19, 1985
Author(s): Walter V.
MANAGUA, Nicaragua - Sens. John F. Kerry and Thomas Harkin (D-Iowa) arrived here last night, expressing hope that their two days of meetings with Nicaraguan leaders will provide them with enough information to sway congressional votes on the issue of aid to anti-government rebels.
NICARAGUA OFFERS TRUCE IF US HALTS CONTRA AID
Published on April 21, 1985
Author(s): Walter V. Robinson, Globe Staff
MANAGUA, Nicaragua - President Daniel Ortega Saavedra, after intensive talks with Sen. John F. Kerry and Sen. Thomas R. Harkin of Iowa, said yesterday that Nicaragua would agree to an immediate cease-fire and other measures to end the country's civil war if the United States ended all support for Nicaraguan rebels.
In a document handed to the two Democratic senators as they left, Ortega also said he would immediately restore civil liberties in Nicaragua and end press censorship if the
GOLDWATER SUGGESTS REPRIMANDS OF KERRY, HARKIN FOR TRIP
Published on April 24, 1985
Author(s): Eileen McNamara, Globe Staff
WASHINGTON - Sen. Barry Goldwater yesterday accused Sens. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts and Tom Harkin of Iowa of violating a federal law that prohibits private citizens from negotiating with foreign governments.
Goldwater, expressing what Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) called "the repressed anger" of Senate Republicans, suggested that the freshman Democrats be formally chided for meeting last week in Managua with Nicaragua's president, Daniel Ortega Saavedra.
LIBERAL ACTIVISTS WORRY SOME STATE DEMOCRATS
Published on April 30, 1985
Author(s): David Farrell, Globe Staff
Sen. John Forbes Kerry's trip to Nicaragua bears out what many relatives on the Forbes side of the family, and most politicians who know him, contend. He's a shrewd opportunist whose personal political ambitions dictate every move he makes.
The arrogance he often displays came through in his boastful assertion last week that his conversations with the Sandinistas "were longer than any the Secretary of State has had with the Nicaraguan government in five years."
CONGRESSMEN DISPUTE SHULTZ ON THEIR ROLE
Published on May 25, 1985
Author(s): Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Congressional Democrats say they are not about to give the Reagan Administration a free hand in Central American policy, even if Secretary of State George P. Shultz considers their behavior "undesirable and reprehensible."
"The Congress more clearly represents the views of the American people, who overwhelmingly disapprove of the Administration's policies in Nicaragua," said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who traveled to Managua last month
ORTEGA'S TRIP TO MOSCOW LOOMS LARGE ON CAPITOL HILL
Published on June 8, 1985
Author(s): Eileen McNamara, Globe Staff
WASHINGTON - The major foreign policy debate of this session of Congress is turning not on issues of national security or international stability but on one man's travels.
The April visit to Moscow by President Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua is cited by enraged Republicans and embarrassed Democrats alike as cause for the most recent resuscitation of debate on Capitol Hill over aid to rebels fighting Ortega's government.
Is this all recent revelations on this traitor's history? Has it taken 30 plus years to come to light? If not, I really have to question the intelligence and integrity of the people of Massachusetts. Not only do they repeatedly put an alcoholic killer back in the U.S. Senate, but this traitor too. Wasn't the first shots of the Revolutionary War fired in Massachusetts? What the hell happened to that state? Is there something in the water?
Who's your Daddy indeed.
And to make it worse, if what happened in Mass stayed in Mass I would say, Se La Vie, but we are having to fight off the scum spreading from their borders. Can you say Big Dig?
> Yes, Lieutenant John Kerry USNR, by his own
> public admission, violated Article 104 (Aiding
> the Enemy, punishable by death), Article 92
> (Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation,
> punishable as a court-martial may direct),
> and Article 100 (Subordinate Compelling
> Surrender, punishable by death) of the Uniform
> Code of Military Justice by illegally meeting
> with the enemy and then championing their demands
> right on the floor of the United States Senate in
> one of the most infamous appearances in the
> Senates history.
But he has such a great plan! He has a plan for *everything*! Who cares if technically he'd be dead a few times over were justice done...
Is this the incident for which GW called him a communist sympathizer today while speaking in New Jersey?
If he ever is ... we will be done as a nation