It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Kerry Always on the Enemy's Side

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 11:04 AM

Excerpt -

Phil Brennan
Tuesday, Aug. 3, 2004

The record is clear: from his anti-Vietnam war activities, to his support of the brutal Sandinista regime in Nicaragua and his participation in the Soviet created and supported "nuclear freeze" movement, John Kerry has most always been on the other side, campaigning vigorously for anti-American causes.

Indeed, had he succeeded in his various attacks on the interests of his country, a defenseless U.S. would have faced a grim future of living under Soviet nuclear blackmail. And the people of Nicaragua would still be captives of a communist dictatorship once run by a murderous child molester with whom Kerry had hobnobbed.

Tragically, Kerry succeeded brilliantly in one of his signature campaigns, helping to condemn the people of South Vietnam to the horrors of life under a communist dictatorship which today still honors him as one of their war heroes.

As he preens himself in the glow of misplaced admiration for his alleged heroism during his four months in combat in Vietnam, he carefully shies away from any real discussion of his sordid anti-American activities. He doesn't like to discuss how he slandered his comrades still fighting in the jungles and rice paddies in Vietnam, calling them war criminals and baby killers.


[edit on 8/4/2004 by FlyersFan]

posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 11:16 AM
The truth is ugly sometimes. I can't wait to see the Lib's have a coniption and start the "you right winger zelots are incapable of seeing truth."

John Kerry is NOT anti american or unpatriotic.

John Kerry is a classic rich liberal. " My money is ok. Yours is bad and you must have earned it through exploitation so Iwill tax it."

posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 11:35 AM
What the heck...

The man supports two peace movments and that is "anti-american" even though peace saved the US from commiting the lives and deaths of tens of thousands of troops?

The nuclear freeze helped prevent WW3 in the 80's by keeping M.A.D. intact.

Some times i worry about other people in my party. I find other republicans can manage to get their head just as far up their posterior as many democrats.

posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 11:44 AM
Quest. read my post and relax.

" John Kerry is not Anti- American."

Supporting peace movements is not the same as supporting policies that give comfort and aid to COMMUNIST governments and groups. And please don't tell me you actually think the test ban supporters were simply peace loving hippies and moms. Even the former Communist U.S.S.R. admitted they funded the movement to undermine the west.

John Kerry is a East Coast Liberal that discusses human rights with governments and people that simply are using him to further their cause.

He is NOT anti american just an ivory tower lib.

posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 12:52 PM
I agree that Kerry is not anti-american, yet I find it odd that his photo is in the hall of heros, along with Jane Fonda, in Hanoi's war museum. I believe that Kerry is more concerned about his own image, comfort, and well-being than he is for the country. JFK stands for "Just For Kerry." I find it strange that he claims to be for the people and in touch with the people but he has never had to worry about wear his next meal is comming from. A very rich east coast liberal who has stock in Haliburton also.

posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 01:34 PM

Originally posted by jrsdls
I believe that Kerry is more concerned about his own image, comfort, and well-being than he is for the country.

I have a feeling this is true of many politicians these days. Politicians
are no longer 'public servants', but they are celebrities in their own
egos and are out to do what's best for themselves.

Perhaps I'm a cynic, but that's what I think.

posted on Aug, 5 2004 @ 03:51 AM
your logic is flawed, just because he doesn't agree with the way that bush/the US is/was doing things doesn't mean that he is on the enemy's side, he can be opposed to bush/the US and the enemy at the same time, is this too much for you to comprehend?

new topics

top topics


log in