The Lies Kerry Told

[cali]

Yes, lies. Direct lies. Lies of omission. Lies that diminish inconvenient facts. Ludicrous hyperbole.

Some examples:

Kerry excludes many groups from the opposition. His definition of Syrian opposition excludes such groups as Jabhat al-Nusra and many others. They are not insignificant players. Fundamentalist now govern large swaths of the north.

Kerry claimed that Syrians are committed to a secular nation. Maybe most Syrians would prefer it, but there are certainly those who don't an they are actively involved.

He expressed "concern" that rebel groups could get their hands on chemical weapons. They already have. And Cruise missiles being fired in to Syria would do nothing to stop them from getting more.

Kerry "absolutely guaranteed" that if the U.S. doesn't strike Assad's regime, Israel will be attacked.

Assad's use of chemical weapons constitutes a threat to the U.S.

[Avalux]

1. Convoluted bullshit from a man I voted for, and hoped would be president.

Makes me kinda sad that he's no different than all the other puppets.

One point - the intent of an air strike is not to take out Assad's regime. Even if we managed to destroy ALL of the chem weapons, he can get more from his friends.

[HooptieWagon]

5. No way to find and destroy CW without boots on ground.

If you bomb CW stockpiles, you release Sarin gas in the neighborhood....which is supposedly what we're trying to prevent. So a strike won't eliminate chemical weapons. And Assad has already defiantly used them (allegedly)...so he's going to do a 180? Doubtful, most likely he uses them more openly and defiantly, especially if he becomes more desparate. Probably against Israel, Turkey, and Jordan. And against US troops if they go in. We're only escalating the war with our involvement.

[ProSense]

2. They're lies because you disagree with him?

"Kerry claimed that Syrians are committed to a secular nation. Maybe most Syrians would prefer it, but there are certainly those who don't an they are actively involved. "

How the hell do you know, and how is that a "lie"?

[tazkcmo]

7. They are lies

because they are not the truth. Pretty simple definition. Or will you tell us what he really meant like with war vs ground war?

[babylonsister]

3. Are you now privy to the info he's privy to?

I thought not.
And for you to call Kerry a liar is beneath you. I think he thinks there's a serious threat out there that could and will escalate.

[cali]

6. it was classic propaganda and there were lies

from him. You don't actually need to be privy to his insider info. By your lights, I shouldn't have said Powell lied concurrent with his actual lies. I did. And I do.

That performance was disgusting and disgraceful.

as more than a few Senators pointed out, the potential for escalation exists within framework of U.S. attacks as well. Maybe more so.

[sendero]

55. Exactly..

.. you know, this country has been in an economic death spiral for over 5 years. Suicides of mostly middle-aged men and women who realize they will never work again are at an all time high.

How much passion can John Kerry or Barak Obama muster for their plight? They can work themselves into an unprecedented lather to spend MORE MONEY WE MUST NOT HAVE SINCE we cannot use it to help starving Americans to get involved in another risky, murky potentially endless war.

It reminds me of the day back in 2002 when NPR ran an interview with Colin Powell in which he made blatant obvious lies about Iraq. I expected at least something like push-back from the interviewer but the interviewer let his obvious lies stand. That was when I realized that:

1) we were going to Iraq for no reason and the truth was not going to be told by anyone.....

2) including NPR which I trusted at the time.

This situation is no different. The people who really run the show have given their orders and the dutiful Obama and Kerry are going to make it happen one way or another.

There is no democracy left in this country.

[AzDar]

78. ...

[woo me with science]

4. Yes, and don't leave out perhaps the biggest lie of all:

We are now hearing absurd, patronizing, and utterly unsupportable promises that boots on the ground will never be needed. As though anyone could predict with certainty, even if motives were assumed to be pure as snow, what will come of lobbing cruise missiles into another sovereign country.

The fact that we are hearing such utter horseshit (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023589314)

shows how casually the lies are flowing now.



Deja bullshit.

Rumsfeld: "I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today would last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that."
--Donald Rumsfeld, November 14, 2002

___________________________________________________________

For Those Doubting if Syria is Part of the Neo-Con Plan
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023584665

McCain: Obama to Send New Arms to Syrian Rebels
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023584769

Obama, ex-rival McCain united as hawks on Syria
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023580983

US general says Syria action could be 'more substantial than thought'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023585737

[questionseverything]

27. .....

Source: The Guardian

Barack Obama portrayed his plans for US military action in Syria as part of a broader strategy to topple Bashar al-Assad, as tougher White House rhetoric began to win over sceptical Republicans in Congress on Tuesday. While stressing that Washington's primary goal remained "limited and proportional" attacks, to degrade Syria's chemical weapons capabilities and deter their future use, the president hinted at a broader long-term mission that may ultimately bring about a change of regime.

"It also fits into a broader strategy that can bring about over time the kind of strengthening of the opposition and the diplomatic, economic and political pressure required – so that ultimately we have a transition that can bring peace and stability, not only to Syria but to the region," he told senior members of Congress at a White House meeting on Tuesday.

Obama has long spoken of the US desire to see Assad step down, but this is the first time he has linked that policy objective to his threatened military strikes against Syria. It follows pressure on Monday, from senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, to make such a goal more explicit. The apparent change of emphasis appeared to resolve some of the political deadlock on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, as House speaker John Boehner and a series of other Republican leaders announced that they would back the president's call for military authorisation from Congress.

There was more good news for Obama when secretary of state John Kerry and defence secretary Chuck Hagel got a relatively easy ride when they testified later to the Senate foreign relations committee, convened in special session to discuss the issue of military authorisation.

(snip)

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/03/obama-strategy-assad-republicans-syria

[Rosco T.]

8. Prove it.

Not what you "think"
Not what you "believe"
Not what "you've heard"

What you can PROVE. Chapter and verse with IMPARTIAL facts.

[tazkcmo]

9. You're setting the bar

Waaaaaaaaay too high. After all, he's a Dem so you should just believe him and suit up for action!

[bvar22]

10. Our last "limited" WAR radicalized the country we "helped".

Libyans Say Sharia Will Be Law of the Land
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/11/libyans-say-sharia-will-be-law-of-the-land.html


"Violence sometimes may have cleared away obstructions quickly, but it never has proved itself creative."--- Albert Einstein

[paleotn]

29. Hmmm. Sounds like some nasty "blow back" to me...

...I know! Lets create a similar situation in Syria. And this time lets add the potential for real WMDs to fall into the hands of some really unsavory religo-nuts.

[pampango]

33. From your link and a recent Pew poll on gender equality in the Middle East.

During the campaign for the country’s elections last July, party leaders—even those from moderate parties, such as Mahmoud Jibril, leader of the National Forces Alliance—acknowledged that sharia would significantly influence any Constitution. New laws should have a “reference to sharia,” Jibril told The Daily Beast, arguing, “Sharia law, when it was understood in the proper way, managed to create one of the great civilizations in human history. The problem is not with sharia or Islam; the problem is with the interpretation of sharia.”

Even among women agitating for a greater role in public and political life here, there’s agreement that sharia law should be at the heart of the country’s new Constitution. The only disputes are about the drafting process; whether the members of a 60-strong drafting panel should be elected or appointed by the country’s new Parliament, the General National Congress; and whether sharia should be the “only source of law” or a “principal source of law,” with the latter allowing greater possibility of adopting laws used in non-Muslim countries.

“Libyans wouldn’t accept a Constitution that isn’t informed by Sharia,” says 20-year-old Issraa Murabit, a second-year medical student from the town of Zawiyah and vice president of The Voice of Libyan Women, an NGO campaigning for greater women’s rights.

She says that a majority of women involved with civil-society activism are broadly comfortable with sharia and don’t see any contradiction between Islamic law and their demands for gender equality and a bigger role for women in Libyan society. Some women activists argue that women’s rights are, in certain cases, better protected under sharia than they are in the West. They cite property protections afforded to divorced spouses. “In the West, they think we are the oppressors of women and they have the best rights for women, but we have a different perspective,” says Murabit, who was raised in Canada until her early teens. “Islam doesn’t undermine women’s rights—the problem is with Muslim men and how they try to use sharia against women.”

Sharia law is not the universal boogey man depicted by Pam Geller and her Islamophobic friends on the far-right. It oppresses when conservative men interpret it conservatively; not when liberal or moderate people do the interpreting.

Here's a Pew poll done in the Middle East on views towards gender equality.



http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/07/10/most-muslims-want-democracy-personal-freedoms-and-islam-in-political-life/

[Sand Wind]

11. You are the one who tell lies. All his point are valid. Nt

[frylock]

12. neener neener

[fadedrose]

15. I don't know Cali to tell lies

She's pretty well informed, has been a little hard on Obama at times, but she does not LIE. Most of the time, and this time, I agree with her....

[Sand Wind]

17. Nope, now she is lying when she say Kerry is lying. Nt

[cali]

21. that's your opinon. I realize YOU don't know the difference between opinion

and fact, but you've not given any evidence that I'm lying. I have given specific examples of Kerry being untruthful and "shaping" the truth in my op.

[paleotn]

30. mmmmmmmm! Koolaid! (nt)

[cali]

13. really, honeypie? Care to be specific?

No, of course not. Your ability to say anything beyond cliches in nonexistent.

lame, pumpkin.

[Sand Wind]

18. Kerry is an honourable man, you are not. Nt

[cali]

22. You're right. I'm not a man. Other than that, you know jackshit about me.

your lame little attacks are about as effective as the rest of your cliche ridden, sentimental claptrap.

[cali]

28. well, as your concept of honorable is probably quite different from mine

that the likes of YOU claim that I'm not honorable, is hardly a concern. Your idea of honorable seems to involve sappy cliches wrapped around missiles and unstinting and unthinking support for the administration.

That is anything but honorable in my book, windy dear.

[rhett o rick]

46. And you have the audacity to decide who is honorable. Open-minded Democrats

would not make that kind of declaration. You dont know Mr. Kerry.

[Bonobo]

14. Will Israel ABSOLUTELY be attacked?

Yes or no.

Which is it?

[bobduca]

53. Bagdad bob is that you?

[JaneyVee]

16. Perhaps Kerry has a little more inside info than you?

[jessie04]

19. Yes...he does.

[dflprincess]

37. Yeah, so did Colin Powell

or that's what we (and the U.N.) were told.

[jessie04]

38. You Really want to compare Kerry with Powell?

Kerry is an honorable man.

[dflprincess]

45. He was.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

76. Are you not quick enough to see the obvious similarities?

That's your responsibility--not anyone else's.

[Sand Wind]

20. She pretend to know better and everybody else is a liar.

Simple....

[cali]

23. nope. I do my homework. I source what I present here.

Unlike some dishonorable little windbags.

And no, not everybody is a liar- but lots of politicians are.

[ProSense]

32. No,

"nope. I do my homework. I source what I present here."

...you're claiming that Kerry is lying, but when faced with the facts, you say they don't matter in your opinion.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023590778#post4

[cali]

34. ridiculous. I was very specific about what I claim Kerry lied about

and it wasn't that. I've stipulated pretty much from the get go that it was the Assad regime that carried out the chemical attack on Ghouta. In the OP I specify what Kerry lied about as well as the type of lies- lies of omission being a piece of it.

Kerry delivered classic propaganda today.

[jessie04]

35. Gee...tough choice...Do I believe Kerry or you ?

I think I'll go with Kerry.

[paleotn]

41. Even when he's obviously channeling....

...Colin Powell, Feb 5, 2003? The similarities are striking. Of course we heaped loads of scorn on Bushies for such blind loyalty back then. Now, my fellow Progressives are doing the exact same thing. Yes, I had a post hidden for the same comment, but, you know, I really don't care. Blind loyalty makes me sick. Particularly when the stakes for all of us are so high.

[bvar22]

43. On this occassion,

I will go with Cali.

I listened to Kerry Sunday and Tuesday,
and agree with Cali.
Colin Powell presented a better case to the UN,
and that was nothing but LIES.

Dropping BOMBS on another country with whom we are NOT at War and killing their people is an Act of WAR by ALL definitions,
and an Act of Aggressive War as defined by most treaties.
Today, Kerry insisted that "limited" air strikes on Syria was NOT an Act of War.
That was NOT a matter of opinion.
That was a LIE.

[cali]

56. go for it. Never mind the facts. Never mind

the numerous people calling Kerry out. Never mind much of Congress.

Blind faith. perfect choice for the likes of you.

[jessie04]

59. "The likes of you" ??

I guess i'm your new "whipping boy". Appears there are many.

"How to make friends and influence people"

[11 Bravo]

79. Check her Transparency page. She ain't big on polite discourse.

But based on her promiscuous use of "sweetie", "cutie", and "honeypie", she gives the impression of an individual starved for affection.

[MNBrewer]

24. Perhaps George Tenet did too...

[cali]

26. yes he does. and he had much more info on the Iraq situation too.

He was wrong then too.

[rhett o rick]

47. And he is keeping is secret because that's how a Democracy works..............not.

Mr. Kerry is a tool of the current administration that is more conservative than Nixon.

[Lee-Lee]

31. "He expressed "concern" that rebel groups could get their hands on chemical weapons."

Maybe I don't follow his logic here- but if we attack Assad, helping the rebels win- who gets all those chemical weapons?

[paleotn]

36. precisely...

...this situation can get so f'd up and so many ways. There's a 1000 ways this could blow up all over those involved.

[HooptieWagon]

77. Rebel groups already possess and have used CWs.

And helping the rebel groups ultimately gives them control of Syria's tanks, artillery, small navy, and fighter jets. And al Qaeda has a country they can conduct training camps in....right on the border of NATO. What can go wrong?

[dflprincess]

39. This is Archduke Franz Ferndinand

Discuss him, how the domino theory applied in the aftermath of his death and what it teaches us in regards to the sideshow so many are pushing for in Syria.

[paleotn]

44. damn straight.

...a simple little assassination in a European backwater somehow turned into 30+ million casualties. Short sighted foreign policy and blind loyalty. But this time it's really, really different....no it really is.

[dixiegrrrrl]

58. lol!

There is a marvelous guy, name of Robert Newman, who did a talk...a stand up show, really, called The History of Oil.
And in it, he debunks the "official truth" of war, by challenging people to look closer at superficial explanations.
He says, about Ferdinand.....
The guy's death caused a World war? REally? Nobody is THAT popular, come on now"
( paraphrasing)

He also suggests looking at WWI as the first step of a of a long war, which really has not stopped, but more or less comes in chapters, which we see as stand alone events..but which are not.

[Catherina]

40. Just got home, what's the first tweet see? What you said

Even CNN won't deny it

[Carolina]

42. What a disgusting tool

he has become...or perhaps always was. After all, he callously voted for IWR!

Excellent post, Cali

[AnotherMcIntosh]

48. Kerry is not a recent pro-war convert. Nor will this end with Syria.

"On December 14, 2001, 3 months after the attacks of 9/11, Kerry said on Larry King Live that "I think we clearly have to keep the pressure on terrorism globally. This doesn't end with Afghanistan by any imagination. And I think the president has made that clear. I think we have made that clear. Terrorism is a global menace. It's a scourge. And it is absolutely vital that we continue against, for instance, Saddam Hussein."

"Kerry said on October 9, 2002; "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry#Iraq

[Catherina]

50. +1000 n/t

[jsr]

49. Recommend

[indepat]

51. Is not the launching of war on a sovereign nation a threat to world order with

unknown and unpredictable consequences? Or would it just be a piece of cake as the Bush administration had claimed with respect to Iraq?

[Niceguy1]

52. I will give him the benefit

Of the doubt since he has more access to info than we do.

[cali]

54. aren't you sweet!

why think about anything at all? why make up your own mind about anything? Hell we have leaders for that. We don't need to trouble our beautiful minds!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

57. THREAD SUMMARY --

ASSERTION: Islamist rebels hold much of the north

REBUTTAL: Kerry's a great guy.

ASSERTION: Islamist rebels might get their hands on CW

REBUTTAL: Kerry's a really great guy!

ASSERTION: Assad doesn't want to antagonize Israel or the US, let alone both simultaneously

REBUTTAL: WHY DO YOU HATE GREAT GUYS!

[treestar]

60. Disagreeing with you is not lying nt

[cali]

61. right. what I pointed out were the SoS's lies.

[Logical]

67. You agreeing with him does not mean he is telling the truth! WTF?? n-t

[geek tragedy]

62. Start the impeachment drive then.

If you supported impeaching Bush for lying us into a war, you must support impeaching Kerry and likely Obama too.

[cali]

64. I don't. I don't think he's lying about the intelligence

that being a critical difference.

And yes, I'm a partisan dem and I don't want to see a democratic President impeached. I'm fine with that bit of hypocrisy.

"Only hypocrites cannot forgive hypocrisy"

Good ol' EM Forster

[jessie04]

63. LOL

"oh my god, oh my god, oh the humanity, this is is the worst thing in the history of the world!!!!......woe is me. Kerry is going to start World War 3....I mean 4....maybe 5. There will be innocent people killed and it will be Kerrys fault. This is a catastrophe!!!! Its an act of war...Kerry wants to kill and will look for any excuse."

[cali]

65. LOL, Like I said anything of the kind.

I just have contempt for his lying ass.

[Logical]

68. ??? Drunk? n-t

[jessie04]

69. Its 5 o'clock somewhere. nt

[Coyotl]

66. Kerry said there is a 100% probability Assad will use Chems again if US does not strike. BS

John Kerry, the Glass Ball SoS! at such a stupid statement. Doesn't he realize other people have a brain?

The man has too large an ego to see straight!

[jessie04]

70. Really ??

He's 100% right.

He will get a green light if the civilized world does nothing. What else should he learn from this??

Just wait till more kids get chemically nuked....cause we did nothing.

[cali]

71. yeah, YOU have a crystal ball just like Lyin' John Kerry.

[jessie04]

72. And if there is no action against Assad

I'm sure some will find some excuse the next chemical attack..

[Coyotl]

73. Your prognostication of the future is equally lame. They used to burn witches for this.

If someone thinks they can foresee the future with 100% certainty, they have a mental problem.

[jessie04]

74. \Yup, thats me....mental problems.

thx

[Coyotl]

75. Not you, people who think the know the future with certainty.

Are you saying you do?