10

Kerry: We Can't Reveal Contents of Secret Side Deals to American People

Posted by $ Your_Name_Goes_Here 9 years, 9 months ago to Politics
34 comments | Share | Flag

We could tell you, but we'd have to kill you?

We have to pass the treaty, er, agreement so that we can see what's in it?

This group of rank amateurs couldn't negotiate their way out of a paper bag. They think they're the smartest folks in the room, but they're playing checkers while our opponents are playing chess.


All Comments

  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That will have to be the next President, however. Obama is openly hostile to the Israelis, refusing to allow them overflight, etc. Remember it was Obama who scuttled an attempt by Israel for an aerial mission to knock out the centrifuges by leaking it to the press.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Owlsrayne 9 years, 9 months ago
    Side Deals: BHO gets to empty Gitmo. No more arms to Israel. Islam the national religion of the USA. They get to sell oil to whoever they want in non-US dollars. Extreme political correctness so that we are forced to accept lone wolf bad guys.
    Saudia Arabia and surrounding states fair game for Iranian expansionism. Oh yes, one more item: first strike on the Jewish State without reprisal.
    Ithnk that should the side deals that were probably agreed to.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Washington could always keep the letter of the agreement but not the spirit, by selling Israel a few dozen earth-penetrator missiles "under the table." That's what I would do.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That's a real problem politically, however, because they would pretty much have to prove breach unless they wanted to acquire bad blood from the other parties (Russia, China, EU, etc.). And with the 23 day inspection policy, it's going to be nearly impossible to catch the Iranians plutonium-handed. The next President is really getting boxed into a corner on this.

    One thing that was mentioned by a legal scholar the other day is that there is a 35-day clause that provides that either side can claim the other is in breach and break things off. I think what you'll actually see is that once Iran gets its hands on the better part of that $150 billion in frozen assets, they'll break things off.

    What is a sheer farce are any of the claims that this prevents the Iranians from enriching uranium or plutonium. There is nothing in there that specifically forces them to stop and nothing which penalizes them even if they are found doing it! This agreement is a total joke.

    The other part that is particularly egregious are the hidden provisions of which their presence was leaked by an insider and the Administration is refusing to release to even Congress, let alone the public. That there were even hidden dealings going on should be an impeachable offense and this is only confirmed by attempting to keep these from the public with so much on the line. Nothing justifies hidden provisions in a treaty.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 9 years, 9 months ago
    Bull crap...if there is nothing to hide then why do they hide? Isn't that what they tell us?
    They have never shown us the least bit of consideration so there is nooooo waaaaay Josa, we're gona trust them now!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Even if upheld, this is certainly nothing more than a "handshake agreement", and the next President will and should drop it like a hot potato.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 9 years, 9 months ago
    Next time Kerry visits Iran, let's send him there by ICBM.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 9 months ago
    Kerry's been making secret side deals for quite a while. One got him out of Vietnam early involved three somewhat suspicious Purple Hearts. I checked back with my old Army unit. No such animal just like I remembered. Apparently he had a secet side deal with the Navy. To my way of thinking he ducked out nine months early. So let's suppose the three scratches were real. By those standards my Purple Heart would have a silver palm device and judged by the seriousness of the wounds I'd been out looking for Number Seven and still working on completing a tour of duty.

    As for negotiating I look at it this way. Why would you vote for anyone or their party who had publicly proven they are incompetent for the job at hand? None of that was secret. They couldn't defend the Constitution and sold it out to be blunt. Not at all what their oath of office states.

    Their is a fine balance between winning and losing especially when the opponent is using terrorist tactics. One has to do very little but prove they can do an 'action' of the proper kind and provoke an inappropriate response.

    The easiest response to provoke once taken is how long it takes the target nation government to abandon it's principles. The Patriot Act is one rather large and very expensive surrender document for many reasons but the primary reason is abandoning civil rights. Civil Rights is often the real target of the terrorist attacks as suspending them proves the government was after all in the wrong and the terrorist revolutionaries are in the right.

    I can't think of anywhere that strategy was more successful than in he United States since 9/11 and still on going.

    Since then it doesn't take much to provoke responses and then having taken that step guide that step guide a retreat and then another response even more inappropriate.

    Especially when the leadership not only starts out showing how weak and incompetent they are but proceeds to publicly prove it

    Which brings us to the real crux of the matter.

    When you know the leadership is weak and incompetent. When you know by the evidence of their actions they are incapable and unwilling to protect the country and it's values. When you have seen them do away with such bedrocks as the Bill of Rights.

    Why are you surprise at secret side deals - if indeed there are any deals at all

    Who has profited the most? Better yet who has lost the most?

    The worst part is Kerry is the runner up to Hillary and if not her replacement for the top spot a shoo in for the second seat.

    No matter if they were working together the whole time or if one side took advantage of a crisis to conduct their own form of revolution.

    Seig Me No Heils Comrade Kerry. I don't serve the party I serve the Constitution.

    It's all in how you view what it really is they were negotiating for.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If the spirit of the Constitution was in any way in play, any international agreement would require Senate ratification, which would mean they would be forced to disclose the entirety of the treaty. Unfortunately, our "Constitutional scholar" of a President is more interested in creating his own version.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The problem is that because the Senate has abdicated it's responsibility in prior instances of international agreements, legal scholars have admitted that because of the way this is being framed, it may or may not require Senate authorization. Obama sure isn't going to submit it to the Senate for ratification because he knows it doesn't stand a chance of getting the votes it would need to pass. So instead he's trying to rely on his crony Democrats to vote down a "resolution of disapproval" - which just like a standard bill, he can veto.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 9 months ago
    Kerry is playing racket ball on a tennis court and can't figure out why his balls are coming back to him. There is not a judge, a prosecutor, a professor, or a elementary school teacher worth their salt that would let you or me get away with an answer like that. And, if it isn't Kerry, it's Clinton, or a half dozen other members of the White House collective that get away with outrageous statements that are bald-faced lies and are still walking the streets when they should be in jail. I thought lying to congress was a crime. I guess it is only a crime if you are a citizen living outside of the Beltway.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Riftsrunner 9 years, 9 months ago
    Are they going to reveal these classified details to all 100 senators? The Constitution gives the ratification power to the Senate because it is the people's protection against such classified deals. I am sure that Kerry will claim only the intelligence committee (those who have classified clearance) will be allowed to know what the classified portions are. I say the Senate vote not to ratify the treaty unless the entire treaty is revealed or they violate the constitution. And there is no veto allowed contrary to what the President believes. This is one of the Legislative checks on the Executive. He can stamp his foot all he wants, but if the Senate votes it down the treaty is dead as far as this country is concerned.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by RobertFl 9 years, 9 months ago
    It boggles the mind. They don't even try to hide it. They are calling us stupid right to our face.
    I honestly do not see how this country can survive until the next President.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    wouldnt it be a shame if there was a big boat with a conference with all our socialist leaders on it- and it sank in 20 min like the luisitania with great loss of life
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 9 years, 9 months ago
    Pathetic. This is not the United States as anyone imagined it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by gaiagal 9 years, 9 months ago
    Imagine the average person giving similar answers to parents, teachers or any person in authority. First, they would be scolded or ridiculed for choosing not to use their brain and sounding like an idiot...then they would be corrected and either grounded, failed, fined or imprisoned according to the circumstances.

    Instead, Kerry, like Pelosi, will continue to sound like an idiot, people will scold/ridicule...and then...nothing. The majority of people in government are working toward the same goal so dog and pony shows prevail.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 9 years, 9 months ago
    maybe there are an unknown number of the population that does not care so idiots like kerry can get away with saying these things and get away with it because they know the population is not going to say "come clean" please. such is life in the usa these days. just don't get used to being treated like an idiot by an idiot.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That's way close enough to what I was intending to write. I'll add this-- I don't think that dimwit could negotiate his way out of a wet paper bag.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 9 years, 9 months ago
    I have a great idea for both Obama and Kerry- fire both of them immediately. They are worse than worthless- they actually damage our country
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo