IRS.FBI.NSA.CIA.EPA.FCC.DHS.ObamaCare.gov   
   XPost: soc.culture.usa, alt.politics.obama, alt.law-enforcement   
   XPost: alt.prisons, alt.revisionism, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.conspiracy, alt.politics.immigration, alt.true-crime   
   XPost: alt.politics.guns, misc.survivalism, alt.survival   
   From: I-WAS-JUST-GANG-PROBED-BY-THE-ObamaRegime-SPY-NETWORK@IRS.   
   BI.NSA.CIA.EPA.FCC.DHS.ObamaCare.gov   
      
   On 3/13/2015 3:48 PM, Joe Cooper wrote:   
   > Secretary of State John Kerry disgraced his office yet again during his   
   > appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on March 11th.   
   > He sharply criticized an open letter to Iran’s leadership drafted by   
   > Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton and signed by 47 Republicans, which simply   
   > made the point that in our democratic republic the president does not get   
   > to bind our country irreversibly to an executive agreement he signs   
   > unilaterally with another country.   
   >   
   > “My reaction to the letter was utter disbelief,” Kerry lamented. He   
   > declared that “this letter ignores more than two centuries of precedent   
   > in the conduct of American foreign policy. It purports to tell the world   
   > that if you want to have any confidence in your dealings with America   
   > they have to negotiate with 535 members of Congress.” He called such an   
   > idea “both untrue and profoundly a bad suggestion.”   
   >   
   > In any event, added Kerry, Congress would not be able to change the terms   
   > of any nuclear deal entered into by President Obama and the other five   
   > negotiating partners with Iran. His explanation was pure Orwellian   
   > doubletalk. Kerry asserted that what he was negotiating would not be   
   > considered a “legally binding plan,” but would have “a capacity for   
   > enforcement.”   
   > At one fell swoop, Kerry displayed contempt, hypocrisy and evasiveness to   
   > members of a co-equal branch of our government and to the American   
   > people.   
   >   
   > Perhaps Secretary of State Kerry forgot what Senator Kerry did shortly   
   > after entering the Senate in 1985 and joining the Senate Foreign   
   > Relations Committee. He was then a junior senator, just like Senator   
   > Cotton is today. However, unlike Senator Cotton, Senator Kerry did not   
   > just write an open letter to the leader of a country with which the   
   > United States had an adversarial relationship. He went much further –   
   > literally.   
   >   
   > At the time, a core element of the Reagan administration’s foreign policy   
   > was to oppose any dealings with the Communist leaning government in   
   > Nicaragua led by President Daniel Ortega Saavedra and to support rebels,   
   > known as contras, who were challenging the regime.   
   >   
   > Kerry did not like the Reagan policy towards the Nicaraguan regime and   
   > opposed providing any aid to the contras. That would have been fine if he   
   > had confined himself to his legislative duties. However, Kerry decided to   
   > actively interfere with the Reagan administration’s foreign policy.   
   > Joined by then Senator Harkin of Iowa, Kerry traveled down to Nicaragua   
   > and met with Nicaraguan President Ortega for face-to-face discussions.   
   > Said Kerry at the time: “Senator Harkin and I are going to Nicaragua as   
   > Vietnam-era veterans who are alarmed that the Reagan administration is   
   > repeating the mistakes we made in Vietnam. I am willing….. to take the   
   > risk in the effort to put to test the good faith of the Sandinistas.”   
   > Senator Kerry brought back Ortega’s offer of a cease-fire if Congress   
   > rejected aid to the rebels.   
   >   
   > Kerry described Ortega’s peace proposal as “a wonderful opening.” On   
   the   
   > Senate floor he said, “Here, in writing, is a guarantee of the security   
   > interest of the United States.”   
   > Shortly after Kerry returned from his trip with his “guarantee” from   
   > Ortega in hand, Ortega visited Moscow where his regime was granted a $200   
   > million loan.   
   >   
   > White House Deputy Press Secretary Robert Sims said the proposal, which   
   > had not been made formally to the U.S. Embassy, contained “nothing   
   new’’   
   > and did not provide for “a dialogue of reconciliation.’’ He said its   
   main   
   > purpose appeared to be aimed at influencing a Congressional vote against   
   > providing aid to the Nicaraguan rebels.   
   >   
   > Secretary of State George P. Shultz condemned the trip. “We cannot   
   > conduct a successful policy when (congressmen) take trips or write ‘Dear   
   > Comandante’ letters with the aim of negotiating” with the Nicaraguan   
   > government, Shultz said. “I’m sure it’s a quite a problem for us when   
   > Senators run around and start dealing with the Communists themselves.’’   
   > Schultz called the Ortega offer delivered by Kerry and Harkin a   
   “fraud’’   
   > that was “designed to distract attention’’ just before Congress was   
   > preparing to vote on aid to the rebels.   
   >   
   > Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger also weighed in. “If the   
   > Nicaraguans want to make an offer, they ought to make it in diplomatic   
   > channels,’’ Kissinger said. “We can’t be negotiating with our own   
   > congressmen and Nicaragua simultaneously.’‘   
   >   
   > Kerry denied that he had negotiated with Ortega.  But that is exactly   
   > what he and former Senator Harkin had done, waving Ortega’s peace offer   
   > that Ortega made directly to them.   
   >   
   > Flash forward 30 years to Secretary of State John Kerry’s hypocritical   
   > condemnation of the Republican senators’ open letter to the leaders of   
   > Iran. No senator traveled to Iran to meet with its Supreme Leader or   
   > president, as Senator Kerry had done when he took it upon himself to meet   
   > with Ortega. All the Republican senators did was to write the equivalent   
   > of an op-ed piece, framed as an open letter to Iran, informing them of   
   > Congress’ constitutional role in connection with any negotiated nuclear   
   > arms deal with Iran. President Obama brought this on himself when he   
   > cavalierly indicated his intention to veto any legislation that would   
   > give Congress the right to review, much less approve, the terms of any   
   > deal with Iran before it goes into effect.   
   >   
   > While Kerry was crystal clear in his criticism of the Republican   
   > senators’ action, his declaration that what he was negotiating would not   
   > be considered a “legally binding plan,” but would have “a capacity for   
   > enforcement,” is another matter. At first blush, it seems to be   
   > internally contradictory. How can something be non-binding yet   
   > enforceable? The answer to Kerry’s cryptic statement lies in the United   
   > Nations Security Council.   
   >   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)