JOHN F. KERRY: PARIS MEETING
I found an interesting site called John Forbes Kerry Timeline. I'll cite this brief passage:
May/June 1970
Kerry... traveled to Paris, France and met with Madame Nguyen Thi Binh, the Foreign Minister of the Provisional Revolutionary Government of Vietnam (PRG), the political wing of the Vietcong, and other Viet Cong and Communist Vietnamese representatives to the Paris peace talks, a trip he now calls a "fact-finding" mission.
(U.S. code 18 U.S.C. 953, declares it illegal for a U.S. citizen to go abroad and negotiate with a foreign power.)
Why did he do this? Perhaps it was his bourgeois version of the "civil/political disobediance" that was so common in those days. Many have followed in his footsteps, and much more openly; just Google Cindy Sheehan. While John F. Kerry parlayed his anti-war activites into a political career, it may have been built on a house of cards, this event being one of them.
How would "President Kerry" treat the war on terror? In his own words, "as a law enforcement matter." How would he deal with the state sponsors of terrorism (No. Korea, Iran, Syria, the PA, as well as factions in every government in the Middle East except Israel)? It's pretty clear that Kerry favors political expediency over what is right for this nation, so that question gives me a shudder. I hope we never know.
Join the "Free John Kerry's 180" Blogburst every Tuesday. Details avilable at Cao's Blog.
Comments
Isn't it historically demonstrated that in my effort to uncover Mr. Leavitt's hidden prejudices, I will need to keep our priorities in check? I ask, because he claims to be supportive of my plan to combat the sexist ideology of careerism that has infected the minds of so many venom-spouting, picayunish slumlords. Don't trust him, though; he's a wolf in sheep's clothing. Before you know it, he'll fortify a social correctness that restricts experience and defines success with narrow boundaries. Not only that, but Mr. Leavitt constantly insists that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless. But he contradicts himself when he says that individual worth is defined by race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. While we all despair over his apolaustic insults, we must also remember the principles that will guide our better behaviors and higher aspirations.
In spite of all Mr. Leavitt has done, I must admit I really like the guy. No, just kidding. My own position on this issue is both simple and clear: He thinks I'm trying to say that we can stop gangsterism merely by permitting government officials entrée into private homes to search for vile proponents of libertinism. Wait! I just heard something. Oh, never mind; it's just the sound of the point zooming way over Mr. Leavitt's head. That's all for this letter. For those that don't like my views, get over it. I suspect that I have as much a right to my views, and to express them, as anyone else. So when I say that Mr. Christopher Leavitt loves quislingism more than life itself, you can agree with me or not. That's all there is to it.